Can we live better lives with religion (response to Transcipt)

[Pygoscelis]

I foolishly clicked on the "active posts feed" onto this thread: http://www.islamicboard.com/lecture-...ml#post2895339

It appears to be a transcript from a lecture, and I mistook it for a long post by a poster here, and wrote a reply to it point by point, since it was so well written and seemed to call for a response from the other side :)

So I'll post it here, in case anybody has read it and is curious what a response to it from an atheist would look like....

--------------------------

However before I get into the thick of the argument, I’d like to highlight that all the negative things, all the evils attributed to religion, are actually not unique to religion.

Technically I agree with this. They are not entirely unique to religion, but religion sure does do them well. You can do tribalism and you can hate the outgroup without religion, but it sure does make it easier if you can LITERALLY demonize the other. You can bury your moral compass beneath obedience to a charismatic leader or other authority figure, but it sure does make it easier if that authority figure is made to be ultimate unquestionable and unassailable, and good by definition. Misogyny, homophobia, etc exists in the non-religious, but is sure is more prevalent in the religious. And I suppose in rare cases you could come up with obtuse reasons to believe in things like vicarious redemption or prayer rituals or magical jinn and the like without religion. Some non-religious people do believe in ghosts. So yes, there is nothing entirely uniquely negative about religion.

Let me give you an example. Let’s talk about the outdated cliché of religion causes war and conflict. Is that unique to religion?

No. Not in the slightest. In face most wars, even "religious wars", are started for non-religious reasons (ie, resources or power etc). Religion just makes them easier to wage and harder to stop. Look at Israel/Palestine conflict. There are factions within both Israel and Palestine that don't want the conflict to end, for selfish reasons, and the conflict has been made impossible to end due to religious reasons. Take religion out of the equation and there MAY be a chance for peace there. Fan the flames of religion and there is little hope for it.

There are many reasons I am not religious, and many reasons why I find most organized religions troublesome, but I'll skip that for now, and go through your post here, as you appear to have put some good effort into it and appear to be writing in good spirit, and you deserve a response.

Let me go into my arguments. My first argument is the sociological argument and it can be summarized as follows: Religion makes your life better in contrast to a lack of religion, because it has been shown to facilitate better mental health, better physical health

If this is true, and it may well be, it isn't dramatic or terribly noticeable.

lower levels of crime

This isn't true. I have seen numerous studies finding no difference, and others finding atheists to be underrepresented in prisons, but I figure that is because atheism correlates with higher education, wealth and intelligence (an easier life).

You'd imagine that atheists would be FAR more criminal than theists if we are to believe all of the stuff I hear from religious folks about how religion makes them more moral, etc. Some, yes even on this very forum, even tell me that without God you can't be moral. And yet jails are not overflowing with atheists, and all without threats or bribes or obedience to a church or God authority. Being good for the sake of being good: That is true morality.

higher levels of happiness

I have seen studies pointing in this direction, and others finding no difference. I am inclined to believe there is something to it, as religious people tend to be very in-group and have greater cohesion and harmony with their fellow in-group members. That may make them more happy.

higher levels of altruism and philanthropic activity

I have seen studies on this as well, and they break down on whether or not you consider supporting the religion to be charitable. If you exclude religion based charities, with conversion as a major part of their goal, you tend to lose the effect. And I would argue very strongly that helping people because it is the right thing to do is far more altruistic than helping people because an authority figure (God) tells you to.

Now, Peter Cave also writes in his book Humanism, “What though is the conceptual or logical link between morality and the belief in God?” Humanists claim there is none. Well in my take of the above, I would later on kindly ask him to reconsider his assumptions. Argument no.2 is a philosophical argument: Religion makes your life better than a lack of religion because of the logic of submission. Listen to this carefully. 1) God is All-Knowing and All-Wise. 2) Human beings are obviously not. 3) Therefore it is rational and beneficial to follow what God has said. [13:31 – 14:18]

This works if you believe. It fails completely if you don't. I point out again that obedience to power is not morality. If you do good because you obey, that is not a moral decision or a moral action. A moral action is doing good because it is the right thing to do. Obedience is doing what you are told no matter what is right. Morality is doing what is right no matter what you are told. We should be careful not to confuse the two. And religion too often does confuse the two.

If you trust that your God knows better than you do what is right and what is wrong, and defer your moral judgment to this imagined God, then those who you believe speak for this God, be it in a holy book, a prophet, or a preacher, gains control over you. That is how people fly planes into buildings. It is how people come to drink poisoned coolaid, and mutilate the genitals of and deny blood transfusions to their children. These latter actions are almost entirely done by the religious, due to this failure to engage their own moral compass, or the overriding of it with obedience to religious dogma. Belief in an imaginary power telling you what to do may be comforting, but it can also be extremely dangerous.

The hidden premises are that God exists, and that He has revealed something to humanity.

Indeed. Accepting that premise will take you a long way towards the point you are trying to make here. Of course, I do not accept that premise, and see you as self-deluded, though hopefully benignly so.

I believe this can be substantiated by showing that the uniqueness of the Quran can only be best explained supernaturally. And in doing so, I will prove the existence of the supernatural cognitive power i.e. God, and at the same time showing that the Quran is what He revealed. In other words, explaining that the Quran is a miracle.

Of course you believe that. You are a Muslim. You will argue that the Quran is unique, and special, and no book can be written like it, which of course is entirely subjective. Mormons think the same of the book or Mormon. I will simply say you are wrong, and that I see nothing unique or special about it, and you will say I am blind or ignorant.

Firstly though, what are miracles? According to the older philosophers such as David Hume and others, they said miracles are violations of natural law. But does this make sense? Surely this is an irony-clad description of what miracles are. Because what are the reality of natural laws? Because natural laws are just inductive generalizations of patters we perceive in the universe. Now if something breaks that pattern, does it mean it’s a miracle? No I think that is incoherent.

I would tend to agree. We don't know everything, and something may change to enable what we thought was impossible before. If I told David Hume that humans would walk on the moon, or showed him my cellphone, he'd think it impossible, and probably call it a miracle.

And I would argue that the best description for miracle are acts of impossibility. So we have to search for supernatural explanation. In the words of the philosopher William Lane Craig, he says “Miracles are events that lie outside the productive capacity of nature.” So in this way, we have to look for non-natural explanations.

But good luck proving that something you observe is outside the productive capacity of nature. I don't think you can do that, so I find this definition of miracle equally flawed as Hume's.

So let’s go back to our definition. Since the Quran cannot be emulated, and since we have exhausted all possibilities of the nature of the Quran which is the Arabic language, then it must be a miracle.

You are literally trying to use semantics, language, and ordering of words to show "events that lie outside the productive capacity of nature"? Just no. Splitting the moon in half is your better avenue here. When astronauts show us evidence on the moon that it was once split in half and then came back together, at around the time the Quran says that it did, that will be far better evidence for you than your self-interested claim that the Quran is special and unique (which many of us find it not to be).

So we have justified the logic of submission: 1) God is All-Knowing and All-Wise. 2) Human beings are not. 3) Therefore it is rational and beneficial to follow what God has said. [17:46 – 18:41]

Even granting your premises here, which I don't, you have another problem with this logic. You are assuming that God is benevolent towards us. Why assume that? You are assuming that God is honest with us. Why assume that? Is it not equally plausible that God views us as an experiment or as toys for his amusement or merely as beings to worship him? I think you have to answer the question of why God made us and how God views us, as in what does God get out of it, before you can make the leap you are making above. Personally, when I read the Torah, Bible or Quran, I don't see a kind and loving God in there, so much as a rather tyrannical, jealous and brutal one.

Another serious problem here is that even if God is perfectly benevolent to humans and knows all, you still have to be sure that you understand what he is telling you... despite there being so many scholars who disagree and religions which conflict within themselves and between each other. If there is a God, and if this God has a message for you, he sure doesn't make it easy to understand, and must not will us all to understand it (if he is all powerful he could do so, no?).

My third argument is a moral argument, and it can be summarized as follows: Religion makes your life better, because it is the only basis for objective morality. Morality that has meaning. The word better in our discussion today is a moral or value judgment. Something is better, something is worse, something is bad, something is good. Now I would argue that without God, we cannot meaningfully discuss today’s topic! Peter should go home! This is because without God, there is no objective value and objective morality. Now this doesn’t mean that humanists or atheists or people of no religion do not display moral behavior. Of course they do! Peter is a great guy. As he says in his book, “The overall humanist stance is that moral behavior needs neither belief in a God nor the motivation to please in a God.” I agree, but the argument here is not about behavior, it’s about moral ontology. The basis of morality. Can we say the holocaust was objectively morally wrong, a 100% wrong, regardless if the Nazis had occupied the whole world and brainwashed us, it’s still objectively wrong. But you can’t say this, without the existence of God. Because I said, God is the only objective anchor that transcends human subjectivity. In this light the famous J.L Makki, a professor of Oxford University and one of the influential atheists of our time, he says “If there are objective values that make the existence of God more probable than would have been without them. Thus we have a defensible from morality for the existence of God.” [18:41 – 21:02]

So you are saying that Good isn't what we subjectively decide or believe is Good, but Good is what God says is good. So how is that any less subjective? You have just removed your own judgment and put it on your God. So whatever God says is good, is good? Is there no truly objective standard outside of God? So if God says it is good to dash children against rocks and hunt and kill homosexuals, then it is? And if God says not to take kafir as friends and not to draw cartoons then its automatically bad, with no basis beyond God says so? Can you see how dangerous this line of thinking could become? Especially if your God is imaginary?

So, can we say that killing a young child is 100% morally wrong? Well, you can only say this if you have a religious or a Godly worldview. Because as I said, God is the only conceptual anchor that transcends human subjectivity.

God only trancends human subjectivity if God is real. If God is not real, then all you are doing is repressing your own moral compass and values and sense of empathy and fairness, and farming out your moral decisions to other people or books that you believe speak for this God. And even if God does exist and does transcend human subjectivity, God is himself making his own subjective judgment.

Euthyprho's Dilemma seems relevant here. Is God good because he meets some independent judment of goodness, or is what we call "good" good because God says so? If God told you to kill your children and fly a plane into a building, with no explanation other than you are to obey him, would you do it? Sometimes I fear that religious people actually would, and that scares me. It shows religion rendering people sociopathic (unable to feel empathy or make moral judgments for themselves).

In the absence of God, there’s only two other possible foundations. And those come from evolution and social pressure. But can evolution provide an objective basis for morality? What does evolution say? That we are just accidental byproducts of a very long, lengthy evolutionary process. That our morality has evolved like how ears and teeth who are toenails. And it’s illusory. Because biology says that we are going to change. And if your morality is pegged on your biology, then your morals are going to change. So it’s not objective anymore. This is why Michael Rouze, a philosopher of Science, points this out. He explains “Morality is a biological adaptation, no less than our hands, feet and teeth. Considered as a rational justifiable set of claims about our objective something, ethics is illusory. I appreciate when someone says ‘love thy neighbor as thyself’, they think they’re referring above and beyond themselves.” Nevertheless, such reference is truly without foundation.” [21:05 – 22:44]

I agree that what we call morality is our evolved senses of empathy and fairness, coupled with the social pressures and beliefs that we hold. We evolved the senses of empathy and fairness for good reason, as a social species, and it is not unique to humans. You can see it in dolphins, dogs, monkeys, and most other social species. Society couldn't function very well without it. And it is constantly pushing us to improve our moral values as we become larger and larger and closer and closer societies. I fear that it is not developing as fast as modern technology is, but it is improving.

As for societal organization and social pressure and culture, we have developed that as well, and it has steadily improved over time. Despite all of the problems that we still have, we do live in the most peaceful era of human history. Note how the bible makes no mention of rape or slavery. These were both once accepted as acceptable by society, and yes, including by religious people. And in fact, it is usually the conservative religious fundamentalist types that are the most resistant to this change. Note how we have now not only reached new moral understandings of slavery and rape, but more recently of inter-racial, and now even gay marriage. Empathy and inclusiveness have prevailed.

You say that Islam is the greatest system and that life under it perfect and harmonious, and as a liberal, I do see a lot in it to praise, especially the forbidding of usury. But this is also the religion and culture that freaks out more over the drawing of cartoons than over violence done in its name. I see room for improvement. Actually, I would bet that in its time, when the Quran was written, Islam was a big improvement over what came before, but my fear is that given the nature of religion, Islam has been slow to improve beyond that. And that goes for pretty much any fundamentalist religion.

[BilalKid]

violence done in its name.

islam perfect, muslims not :shade:

[Serinity]

a criminal can use a knife to kill people, while a butcher can use a knife to slaughter animals and distribute it to the poor.

Is the knife the cause of all the killings happening? No. It is the people that is the problem, not Islam, ever.

Are the guns the problem? The airplanes? The tanks? No. Rather the problem lies within mankind. The solution is Islam.

Islam is here to fix all problems, but mankind turn away, or get decieved by their desires, or shaytaan.

[Pygoscelis]

islam perfect, muslims not :shade:

That which is declared perfect cannot improve. A holy text or doctrine may be an improvement over what came before it, but in declaring it perfect, it then becomes a barrier to further moral progress.

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[Bhabha]

That which is declared perfect cannot improve. A holy text or doctrine may be an improvement over what came before it, but in declaring it perfect, it then becomes a barrier to further moral progress.

In the Quran there were things that were not understood before. Things that didn't make sense, because our own mental capacities were limited. Now certain things begin to make sense as we read through them.

The Quran is complemented by the Hadiths and the consensus of scholars (for sharia law), which governs things such as financial transactions, marriage, etc. It's a whole system, but who said it is static?

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you Pygoscelis;

I believe you can find God in the morality that seems to go beyond human nature, you mentioned forbidding usury. There is also the need to forgive others, not to judge, as we will be judged in the same way, dress modestly and give to the poor. Fasting also brings us closer to God, it is a way of trying to control our excesses.

Twenty thousand children will die needlessly today of grinding poverty, starvation and preventable disease. True justice would mean these children would be treated fairly and in the same way as children in the developed world, so they would not starve. Only God can put this right in a greater good life after death.

I think more people would kill; if they thought they could get away with murder. If you have a true faith in God, it would not just be a case of evading man's justice, but the thought of also having to answer to God. When you look at the 99 names of Allah, I believe this is a good description of God's character.

I think you can find a profound sense of peace from trusting in God, I don't think you can find this peace without God.

I believe this passage is also in the Quran....

34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

In the spirit of searching for justice and God.

Eric

[Serinity]

That which is perfect CAN't improve, cuz it is already perfect. What you call improvement is merely degradation of our moral state, WE corrupt ourselves, we are our own worst enemy.

Islam is perfect, supreme, Islam calls towards the natural state we were born as.

Islam ensures optimal security, stability and flexibility. If there was no punishment for murder, there'd more murderers, no punishment for rape, illegal sex, prostitutes, etc. Would increase such immoral behsviour.

You only harm yourself if you disobey Allah SWT, you will never be able to harm Him SWT. It'd be also ignorant and arrogant.

I say that we don't even understand what perfection means in its true and full sense. Knowing that Allah SWT is All-Wise, All-Knowing, there is no need for us to meddle in and try to redefine morality - for if we try to redefine morality according to ourselves, whims and desires. It'll only confuse us and cause chaos.

We polute everything around us. Allah created everything in balance and harmony, the ecosystems etc. Are all very good, yet we are the one who destroys those kinda things.

doesn't it show that to go against Allah SWT is to lose yourself? If you try to redefine nature, you'll destroy it. Cause Allah SWT created nature. We can NEVER do better than Allah, Exalted be He.

if u try to improve morality, you'll destroy it.

[Freedom]

Religion's purpose is to guide us towards a better afterlife, not to give us a better life in this world.

[Misbah0411]

That which is declared perfect cannot improve. A holy text or doctrine may be an improvement over what came before it, but in declaring it perfect, it then becomes a barrier to further moral progress.

Spoken like a true atheist that uses flawed logic and leads him further astray. What is moral progress to you? Is it like accepting gay marriage in secular society or even adultery? Morality doesn't have to evolve. It comes from the Creator who knows best what is right and wrong. Stealing was wrong 5000 years ago and and is still wrong today. Same with adultery, murder, etc. The problem is when man tries to take the role of the Creator and make laws that contradict Him.

[Misbah0411]

Religion's purpose is to guide us towards a better afterlife, not to give us a better life in this world.

Incorrect. You have a flawed understanding of Shariah. Islam came to make this dunya tolerable while preparing the believer for the Hereafter.

[Serinity]

Those who try to take the role of the Creator only harm themselves and others who follow them, they lead themselves and others astray.

Morality comes from Allah SWT. Allah SWT knows best what is right and wrong. Mankind however choose to follow desires rather than morals. They confuse themselves, humans are not fit to be a lawgiver. Allah SWT is the only Lawgiver. The Ruler.

May Allah SWT forgive me if I said wrong . Ameen.

Allahu alam.

[Serinity]

It is flawed logic, btw. No human can ever determine right and wrong, I'd say that is utmost arrogance. Only Allah SWT determines that, not humans, ever.

I hate humans who think they can say and decide what is right and what is wrong, they can never, and will never decide that. Sodomy is filth, and will stay filth. Just because humans 'legalise' it, doesn't make it right. Who are we to go against the Creator? That is just arrogance.

Those who take the people and make the people decide what is right and wrong, has taken them as false gods, authu billah. They obey and follow the people.

May Allah SWT forgive me if I said any wrong. Ameen. Allahu alam.

[piXie]

Pygoscelis

Please englighten us as to what will give us a better life then? No laws to follow and everyone do as they please?

A holy text or doctrine may be an improvement over what came before it, but in declaring it perfect, it then becomes a barrier to further moral progress.

Further moral progress or further moral corruption and degeneration?

[Serinity]

There is no need for further moral progress. It isn't in mankind's ability or responsibility to say what is right or wrong!

If mankind tries to take the role of the Creator, chaos, blodshed, and corruption will happen. But they'll say "we are but reformers!" nay, they are the corrupters.

Morals isn't something you can change, it is constant. You are only deluding yourself, by saying that we can change morals, we shouldn't. It'll lead to corruption. Further corruption.

Whether I can kill a person or not, is conditioned by the circumstances. If I said "you can now kill people on the street.. Kill all women!" does that make it moral? Who are we to do so? Moral doesn't progress. Morality is from Allah SWT. We'd only corrupt ourselves if we tried to say what is right or wrong.

[Pygoscelis]

There is no need for further moral progress.

That may be the saddest thing that I have ever read.

It isn't in mankind's ability or responsibility to say what is right or wrong!

Yes, it is. We do it all the time, and it is imperative that we do it. Even if a God exists, you have made the moral decision to judge him as Good and to follow him. You have read your holy texts and have understood your religion in a particular way, reading your own moral sense into it. Why else would some here come to see Islam as peaceful and loving (injecting a strong moral sense), while others follow like Daesh (failing to do so). Subduing your own moral sense in deference to obedience to what you think is Allah can only go so far, because you read your own moral sense into what you decide Allah wants.

We also face many moral quandaries due to advancing technology that was simply not contemplated by those who wrote the Quran (or any ancient holy text). Everything from stem cell research to cloning to organ donation to blood transfusions to meat cultivated in labs without living animals come with moral considerations that we need to address and that the thoughts of people hundreds of years ago can't help you with. As technology advances further there will be more and more of these moral issues to address, and we need to keep moral progress strong, keep empathy and fairness and our other moral senses unimpeded by religious dogma, to come to ethical and equitable answers.

And, of course as you know, I see no reason to believe that Allah does exist, so by "obeying Allah" I only see you as obeying those who claim to and who have claimed to speak for Allah. The human brain and human culture and society is all we've got to answer moral issues. I know that thought scares you, but hiding from it and pretending there is some celestial tyrant to bow down to, so that you don't have to take responsibility for your own moral decisions, doesn't help and often hurts.

Obedience to power is not morality. Morality is doing what is good no matter what you are told. Obedience is doing what you are told no matter what is good. We need to not confuse the two. If you came to believe that Allah wanted you to fly a plane into a building or kill your children, with no further explanation, would you do it? If your answer is yes, then you are amoral and may be a sociopath. If your answer is no, then you have your own moral compass and sense of right and wrong independent of your obedience to Allah. If you answer "God would never do that" despite what is written in holy texts etc, then that is a cop-out.

Or perhaps you would say that you would do it, but trust that God must have some good reason for it outside of your knowledge, because God knows all and you do not, which is where I think the speaker in the OP transcript was going. I pointed out some serious flaws with that logic above. You'd have to assume God's intention, and that he is good and benevolent towards you. And you'd have to be certain that you got his message and intention correct, despite the millions of different understandings from different people claiming to have gotten it from him. And at the end of the day, if your God doesn't exist but you only think it does, then your God belief has led you to do something horrible.

Morals isn't something you can change, it is constant. You are only deluding yourself, by saying that we can change morals, we shouldn't. It'll lead to corruption. Further corruption.

Moral values have changed and do change. Slavery and rape were once accepted in most human societies, including highly religious ones (which were most if not all of them). We have made moral progress since then and now know that it is wrong to own another human being or to force sex on an unwilling person.

Mohammad himself (at 50) married Aisha and consummated the marriage with her when she was very young (between 6 and 15 depending on what sources you believe). We now see that as wrong and would call it statutory rape (anything under 18). Science has shown us that the human brain is not fully and completely developed to enabled true informed consent for such decisions at that age (especially at the younger end of that spectrum). Even if she was 18 or 19 a lot of people today would see it as suspect, him being 50. This has often been used to attack the prophet and his religion, but the truth is that in that time and place it was considered perfectly acceptable and moral, and she was likely seen as an adult by her society, as the Quran says that a marriage must be between consenting adults. And that itself is a nice improvement over the old testament Bible, which treats women as property, and marriage as a contract of sale between a father and a husband.

[MuslimInshallah]

I believe this passage is also in the Quran....

34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

In the spirit of searching for justice and God.

Eric

Assalaamu alaikum,

Just to clarify, this quote is from the Gospel of Matthew in the New Testament (Bible), not the Qur'an. I think what Eric was trying to say is that he thinks the Qur'an also expresses the idea of doing good for others, as a way of doing something Pleasing to God.

May God Bless you all with the Light of faith.

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you MuslimInshallah;

Just to clarify, this quote is from the Gospel of Matthew in the New Testament (Bible), not the Qur'an.

Sorry if I did not make this clear, but I also seem to remember reading a very similar passage from the Quran. old age is creeping on, so please forgive me if I am mistaken.

I think what Eric was trying to say is that he thinks the Qur'an also expresses the idea of doing good for others, as a way of doing something Pleasing to God.

Yes, I believe that to be true

Blessings

Eric



May God Bless you all with the Light of faith.[/QUOTE]

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you Pygoscelis;

And I would argue very strongly that helping people because it is the right thing to do is far more altruistic than helping people because an authority figure (God) tells you to.

I think many of the charitable organisations would disappear; if you took religion out of our towns. The basics food bank, homeless shelter, good neighbour group, Street Pastors, lunch clubs for vulnerable people, support for the disabled, elderly, community centres and many more.

These groups operate week after week and year after year, they are funded and staffed by volunteers from the churches. I know other religions do the same kind of good deeds for people in need.

If religion disappeared, would there still be the will to help vulnerable people?

In the spirit of searching for justice for all people.

Eric

[Karl]

Is "Humanism" just another religion? Secularism and atheism is a new global fanaticism.

[Pygoscelis]

If religion disappeared, would there still be the will to help vulnerable people?

Is this a serious question or are you trolling? Do you think that if religion ceased to exist then there would be nobody to help the homeless or feed the hungry or conduct other charitable works? Do you really think that? If you do then you are viewing the world through a very religious filter and blinding yourself to secular reality.

Consider the history and culture of the area you speak of when you see all of the religious charities you speak of. Are these people helping others because their religion tells them to, or are they helping others because they know it is the right thing to do? A good litmus test would be to look and see if they help people not of their religion as much as those of their religion. Groups like the Red Cross or Salvation Army, etc are pretty much religious in name only. There is a Catholic Family Support charity near where I live that you would never guess was "Catholic". Most of their staff are not Catholic and they serve anybody and everybody and don't preach any Catholic doctrines (they help homosexuals without judging, distribute condoms (directly against Catholic doctrine), etc).

In the absence of such charities, secular ones would pop up very quickly to fill the void. They already do to a large degree. Doctors without borders, united way, local soup kitchens and homeless shelters, etc. Most of the charitable organizations here in Toronto are not in any way associated with a religion, and we're more socialist than the US of A. Then you've got the nordic countries (Denmark, Sweden, Norway), highly irreligious and outright socialist, caring far more for the group than for individual gain.

I can assure you that if religion ceased to exist, charity would not. Although we may get rid of a few religious "charities" that are more about saving souls than saving lives.

[Pygoscelis]

Is "Humanism" just another religion? Secularism and atheism is a new global fanaticism.

Humanism is not secularism is not atheism.

Secularism isn't even a stance on religion. You can be a pious religious person (though maybe not a Muslim) and be a secularist. It just means that you want to keep the religion and the state separate. To paraphrase the bible "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and render unto God what is God's" or something like that. THe idea is to protect both the state and the church from each other. And the church benefits from it just as much as the state does. It means we the people who are not in your religion can't tell you how you must practice it. The fight you and I both wage against bans on hajib etc, is a SECULAR cause. It is a fight to keep the state from interfering with internal religious business.

Atheism is nothing more than the lack of belief in God(s), so atheists can be humanists or they can be nihilists or anything in between. And they are not always secularists, as the atheists among the people pushing the ban on hajib exemplify.

Humanism is a world view much like a religion, though I'm not aware of any strict dogma, holy books, or spiritual leaders. They do have some core beliefs and tenets that they all seem to agree on to define themselves as humanists. Humanism is basically faith in humanity; the belief that human beings are essentially good and that human beings can solve the problems that face the world (without the need for Gods).

[ardianto]

Do you think that if religion ceased to exist then there would be nobody to help the homeless or feed the hungry or conduct other charitable works? Do you really think that? If you do then you are viewing the world through a very religious filter and blinding yourself to secular reality.

Greeting and peace be with you Pygoscelis.

I've ever made a thread which I asked question "Without reward, would you give charity?". Yes, I see bad habit among religious people which they help the others not because empathy, but because they expect reward, even reward in the world like give charity because they expect God will help them to pass exam.

I myself help the others because sense of humanity. But to be honest, my belief in God help me to raise my sense of humanity. I got many easiness in my life. But I realize, that's because I was born in wealthy family. I realize, God could make me born as someone else in poor family. And if it's happened, then my life would not as easy like this. It raised consciousness in my heart to help people who are not as lucky as me.

If I don't believe in God, probably I would not realize it. Probably my sense of humanity would not grown up as good as now.

[Serinity]

There is no guarantee whether tomorrow, what is legal today, is illegal tomorrow. Mankind is in no position right and wrong. they have no right to tell what is right and what is wrong.

Morality is from Allah SWT. to ignore that and think of yourself as 'evolved'. Is plainly arrogance without bound, to me.

To ignore and not care about the Creator, is arrogant.

We've The Criterion sent to us by Allah SWT, and we'll never obey the kuffar in disobedience to Allah SWT. What is wrong will always stay wrong, what is right will always stay right, regardless of what humans say. Homosexuality, transgenderism, etc. Will always stay wrong. And is wrong,

When the leader of the Kuffar go and deviate, so does the rest of the kuffar. folllowing their desires in arrogance and/ or Ignorance.

[Karl]

"Humanism is basically faith in humanity; the belief that human beings are essentially good and that human beings can solve the problems that face the world (without the need for Gods)." Well there is the fatal flaw as people are more evil than good. And they only solve problems by killing each other. So that's why people need gods to give them hope. It is a lot easier to have faith in gods or God than other people. Divinity lifts people out of the pit. What does godlessness do for them? Gives them depression. The atheist says "There is no God so your life of toil and misery and pain has no reward, you will die and rot and be forever in oblivion". How is that going to work? Think of the consequence's. Pushing Godlessness is the worst thing you can do. Why do it, what is the point? Only nefarious reasons I am sure.

[Serinity]

It is arrogance, they refuse to bow down and acknowledge Allah SWT as their Lord, and persist in their denial.

Or it is ignorance, in which case, may Allah SWT guide them. Ameen.

but here goes, those militant atheists are so angry at god, they know there is a God, but they choose to deny Him, but their anger and arrogance makes them go against Allah SWT. Much like what Iblees did.

Shaytaan blamed Allah SWT for his hardships, mistakes and problems, the atheists blame Allah SWT for why they're poor, why life's hard, why my family member died, etc. etc.

The atheists delude themselves and others that God doesn't exist. That we men can become 'God.'

Like why would you go in war against Allah SWT? To those who do, a painful doom awaits them, a very painful one. Why would you fight believers in Allah SWT?

If it was possible for Iblees, a once pious one, to get soo corrupt, then what about us?

[Pygoscelis]

but here goes, those militant atheists are so angry at god

Nope.

First, atheists tend not to be militant. You don't see too many flying planes into buildings or forming an ISIS equivalent in the name of there being no God. The most militant you'll see atheists get in the name of no-God is mocking your religion, drawing rude cartoons of your prophet, or trying to petition government to ban hajib and stuff like that. Not good, but it doesn't equate to chopping off heads in the name of No-God.

Second, when atheists are upset regarding religion, they are upset at religious people and religion, not at God, which they don't believe exists. It would be rather nonsensical to be angry at something that doesn't exist. It would be like adults being upset at Santa Claus. It isn't God that bothers "militant atheists". It is the religious people and their arrogant and aggressive nature due to belief in God that upsets them. Atheists have been murdered by religious people for being "infidels" or "kafir" for centuries, milenia even... so some of them don't react well to religion.

they know there is a God, but they choose to deny Him

Nope. Why is it so hard for you to understand or accept that there exists people who don't believe what you do? Does it threaten your own faith or something? Why so fragile? You seem to very badly need us all to believe in your God. But sorry, just not the case.

Atheists don't push against your God. They push against the religious believers, and their pushing of religion. It is witch hunts that are concerning, not actual magical witches, which don't exist.

the atheists blame Allah SWT for why they're poor, why life's hard, why my family member died, etc. etc.

If they did, they wouldn't be atheists, by definition. Atheists are people who don't believe Gods exist.

The atheists delude themselves and others that God doesn't exist. That we men can become 'God.'

You keep insisting on the first sentence, but what is with the second? People who don't believe in Gods think the can be Gods? Is this some weird scientology thing you are talking about?

[Pygoscelis]

Divinity lifts people out of the pit. What does godlessness do for them? Gives them depression. The atheist says "There is no God so your life of toil and misery and pain has no reward, you will die and rot and be forever in oblivion". How is that going to work? Think of the consequence's. Pushing Godlessness is the worst thing you can do. Why do it, what is the point? Only nefarious reasons I am sure.

Are you saying that religion is the opiate of the masses? That it is better to believe in celestial justice, just for the comfort it provides, regardless of it being a self-delusion? I would prefer to face the truth, even if it is unpleasant, than live in a fantasy.

And let us not pretend that religious belief is all rainbows and puppies. You'd have far fewer anti-religion atheists if it was. But you have the doctrine of hellfire and divine punishment for a wide range of rather arbitrary things ranging from what you eat to who you have sex with to who you are kind to and be friendly towards to what you believe and if you picked the right God. Atheists don't have such concerns. There is literally nothing to fear from death when death is nothingness.

And with only this life to live, it becomes that much more precious and imperative to make life on earth as good as it can be, to help our fellow humans, to develop our ethics beyond what religion would have them be, rather than treating this life like a waiting room or testing ground for something that comes afterwards, or halting moral progress to adhere to something we codified centuries ago.

[Pygoscelis]

If I don't believe in God, probably I would not realize it. Probably my sense of humanity would not grown up as good as now.

Could be. But I doubt it. I think you are not giving yourself enough credit. I bet you would have developed your sense of humanity just as well. You would just see it in another context.

I didn't need religion to feel a strong sense of empathy and fairness towards my fellow humans and other animals as well. And not having a religion to tell me what to think or believe, I had to think it through on a much deeper level, and it is very easy for me now to see beyond tribalism and authoritarianism. If somebody tells me something is "wrong" they had better have a good reason, far beyond "because X says so".

[Bhabha]

As for the comments on ISIS and the September 11, 2001 (there are two other September 11s that changed history. One was in 1609 when Christian Spain announced the forceful expulsion of Moors from Spain and the atrocities of Chile that were caused by US capitalism interested in the region) the 2001 one was nothing compared to how many people died in the other two. Anyhow, before associating these events to religion, please educate yourself on the political factors that fostered the environment for them in the first place.

Secondly, what you say atheists are doing in terms of mocking Islam, is what Christians did in Spain during the 12th century when they mocked Islam, made rude comments about our prophet, and eventually went to remove the veil.

Don't confuse things Christians did in the times of the crusade for things you assume Muslims are the only ones doing, since you state infidels and kafir, words associated with the Islamic religion. Muslims didn't do witch hunts, it was Christians. Muslims didn't push the religion on anyone (until recently). Please read up on history before transposing the things Christians did during their crusades and during their colonial expansions.

[Misbah0411]

Atheists don't push against your God. They push against the religious believers, and their pushing of religion. It is witch hunts that are concerning, not actual magical witches, which don't exist.

Why are you even on this forum? Don't they have atheist forums to spew your nonsense. With over 3800 posts it looks like your the one trying to push your beliefs on the Muslims. Your not convincing bud. Go find something else to do with your time while you wait to meet your Creator.

[Serinity]

Idc what you say Pygoscelis, the right path has been made clear from the wrong, whosoever desires to meet their Lord, let him seek Him, whosoever deviates, only deviates at the expense of their own soul.

you don't harm Allah SWT, but you harm yourselves, you call us deluded, but you are deluded.

Is the one who walks erect on the straight path the same as the one who walks on their face? No.

Islam is the Truth, The Light, the straight path. It has no mysteries - it is clear. But those who follow their desires and lusts are in a great confusion.

Those who mix falsehood with truth, are in confusion, those who try to to erase Truth, Al-Islam, by falsehood and their imagination is in even a greater deviation and delusion - deluded by shaytaan, following in his footsteps. you are only inventing falsehoods against Islam, to bring it down, but if you don't desist in ridiculing Islam by your falsehood, you'll be encompassed by what you used to ridicule.

For verily those who ridicule Islam, either by ridiculing the muslims, the laws, etc. they'll be encompassed by what they used to ridicule.

you see us deluded, but in fact, you are the one deluded, in confusion of what is false and true.

But nay, truth will prevail over falsehood, sooner or later. For what is false is bound to collapse before Truth.

Those who disbelieve in the Truth, Al-Islam, is in a confused state. They then go over to manmade laws, etc.

But if one turns to Allah SWT, they'll find Him SWT Forgiving, Most Merciful.

Islam came to clarify to man, right from wrong, truth from falsehood. Idk your heart, but the fact that you are soo confused about what is true and what is not true, just shows your confused state. You wander in doubt thinking "how do we know Islam is truth?" and here you await a sign, but isn't there enough signs for those who give insight?

Make no mistake - if you fight the Muslims, you are at WAR with Allah SWT. And don't play games with me, I know many atheists who want to kill muslims because of their hatred for Islam. Why do atheists go to war to fight the Muslims?

Why? To Erase Islam, by bringing their kufr system into place. Why do atheists fight? They are fighting a losing battle from the start.

They seek to erase the light of Islam, but Allah SWT refuses, except to perfect His Light. (an ayat)

[Serinity]

Those upon the Fitrah will recognize Islam, and its Light.

Those who persist in their deviation and goes far away from the Quran, and don't turn, will find it harder to see the truth.

The Truth is Islam, the One and Only truth, the reality. No ifs or buts about it.

[Pygoscelis]

Make no mistake - if you fight the Muslims, you are at WAR with Allah SWT. And don't play games with me, I know many atheists who want to kill muslims because of their hatred for Islam. Why do atheists go to war to fight the Muslims?

First, I think this is mostly in your imagination. I have never heard of an atheist killing somebody over a cartoon or intentionally flying a plane into a building or chopping off heads because of their staunch belief that there is no God.

When Atheists, as well as Christians, as well as other non-muslims speak nasty things against Muslims and do nasty things to Muslims, it isn't about Allah. It is about the Muslims themselves. It is xenophobia/tribalism (seeing Islam s the new other; the old was communism) combined with misperceptions of Muslims due to behavior of a few Muslims that gets sensationalized. That's where the chopping off heads, flying planes into buildings and murder over cartoons come in.

[Karl]

Are you saying that religion is the opiate of the masses? That it is better to believe in celestial justice, just for the comfort it provides, regardless of it being a self-delusion? I would prefer to face the truth, even if it is unpleasant, than live in a fantasy.

And let us not pretend that religious belief is all rainbows and puppies. You'd have far fewer anti-religion atheists if it was. But you have the doctrine of hellfire and divine punishment for a wide range of rather arbitrary things ranging from what you eat to who you have sex with to who you are kind to and be friendly towards to what you believe and if you picked the right God. Atheists don't have such concerns. There is literally nothing to fear from death when death is nothingness.

And with only this life to live, it becomes that much more precious and imperative to make life on earth as good as it can be, to help our fellow humans, to develop our ethics beyond what religion would have them be, rather than treating this life like a waiting room or testing ground for something that comes afterwards, or halting moral progress to adhere to something we codified centuries ago.

"Are you saying that religion is the opiate of the masses?" "Religion is the opium of the people" that's what Karl Marx said, but he was wrong. Religion gives people positive hope and a spiritual lift to transcend their primeval form.

"That it is better to believe in celestial justice, just for the comfort it provides, regardless of it being a self-delusion?"

What are your delusions? To follow the whims of the godless mob, to change laws and morality to a degenerate nature because it is some radical "modern" Anti Christ United Nations way and try and shove it down our throats.

"I would prefer to face the truth, even if it is unpleasant, than live in a fantasy".

What do you know IS the truth? You believe in your beliefs and others have theirs.

"And let us not pretend that religious belief is all rainbows and puppies. You'd have far fewer anti-religion atheists if it was. But you have the doctrine of hellfire and divine punishment for a wide range of rather arbitrary things ranging from what you eat to who you have sex with to who you are kind to and be friendly towards to what you believe and if you picked the right God. Atheists don't have such concerns. There is literally nothing to fear from death when death is nothingness".

Well so do the Atheists, they have even more oppressive bigotry, rules and regulations and they are constantly increasing them globally.

"And with only this life to live, it becomes that much more precious and imperative to make life on earth as good as it can be, to help our fellow humans, to develop our ethics beyond what religion would have them be, rather than treating this life like a waiting room or testing ground for something that comes afterwards, or halting moral progress to adhere to something we codified centuries ago".

Why? If you only have this life, wouldn't it be better to live it in the pursuit of pleasure than to badger us with your Anti Christ propaganda? Or are you getting paid for doing this?

[Pygoscelis]

Well so do the Atheists, they have even more oppressive bigotry, rules and regulations and they are constantly increasing them globally.

We'll have to agree to disagree on who has the more oppressive bigotry, rules and regulations (atheists are still a tiny minority and lack such power).

But even if atheists did engage in more oppressive bigotry, rules and regulations as you say, not having them hitched to unquestionable dogma means you can reason with them, and demand that they justify their positions with some sort of argument beyond "because God says so".

[Karl]

We'll have to agree to disagree on who has the more oppressive bigotry, rules and regulations (atheists are still a tiny minority and lack such power).

But even if atheists did engage in more oppressive bigotry, rules and regulations as you say, not having them hitched to unquestionable dogma means you can reason with them, and demand that they justify their positions with some sort of argument beyond "because God says so".

Ok what about the secular dogma of the age of 18. And all the age related restrictions. This form of bigotry is extreme, everyone is defined by age. This is totally subjective and irrational but atheists believe in it. To restrict someone because of their age is no different than restricting them by race or gender, it is pure prejudice. Islam does not do this, all restrictions are for objective reasons.
I do not believe that atheists are low in number because there are many that call themselves Christians and Muslims etc. that are really crypto Marxists. Even the pope is a Marxist.

[Pygoscelis]

The age of 18 isnt an atheist thing. Why would you think that? It is just one of many arbitrary age cutoffs that societies use. I am fairly certain most of these ages were chosen by Christians where I live, but I dont link it to religion.

The idea is that under a certain level of development (both physical andnin mental maturity) children are not able to understand and make some decisions for themselves. The actual point people become mature enough varies from person to person of course, and the numbers that are put into law are just used for the sake of consistency and uniformity so the laws can function.

You may know a 14 year old that hit puberty early and thinks and functions more maturely than most adults, but it is still illegal to let her drive your car and sex with her is still statutory rape.

That has nothing to do with atheism, and although Christians wrote those rules, probably has nothing to do with Christianity either. And I see absolutely no reason from lacking God belief why Atheists would be particularly adverse to changing the numbers up or down.

Oh, and the pope being an atheist is a funny thought.

[Eric H]

greetings and peace be with you Pygoscelis;

Is this a serious question or are you trolling? Do you think that if religion ceased to exist then there would be nobody to help the homeless or feed the hungry or conduct other charitable works? Do you really think that? If you do then you are viewing the world through a very religious filter and blinding yourself to secular reality.

I was talking more about the charitable schemes in our town, The council and the police often make appeals for volunteers through our local churches. I was at a council training day recently, they were advising disabled people were they can go for help, and churches were mentioned a couple of times.

I have been involved in helping homeless people, often they do not tick all the boxes to get help through our local council and benefit service. The council then recommend these people to get support finding jobs and housing through church schemes, there do not appear to be any secular schemes on offer in our town.

A homeless shelter is being opened in our town in the next couple of weeks, funded by churches and most of the volunteers are from churches too.

Consider the history and culture of the area you speak of when you see all of the religious charities you speak of. Are these people helping others because their religion tells them to, or are they helping others because they know it is the right thing to do?

I think a bit of both, if some people need encouraging to help others, why would this be bad? I meet a lot of youngsters out of work, I try and encourage them to do voluntary work, whilst they are looking for paid work.

When we are out with the Street Pastors, sometimes people offer us money when we have helped them. I decline the money, but ask them instead, to be kind to a random stranger, and pass the kindness on.

A good litmus test would be to look and see if they help people not of their religion as much as those of their religion.

Agreed, and the voluntary work I enjoy the most, is when different churches work together for the common good. I would also like to see a greater interfaith cooperation in charity work.

In the absence of such charities, secular ones would pop up very quickly to fill the void.

My experience of starting up charitable schemes has involved a lot of people, money and resources. Religion, by its very nature has lots of people and structure.

In the spirit of praying for justice for all people

Eric

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you Pygoscelis; I think the big problem for mankind is, how do we seek justice for all people?

First, atheists tend not to be militant. You don't see too many flying planes into buildings

And Mr Bush's response was God bless America, then he bombed Afghanistan and Iraq. It seems Mr Bush ignored the two greatest commandments to love God and neighbour, he overlooked loving and praying for your enemy, so I ask, why would God then bless America.

In the search for justice after 9/ 11, Mr Bush did not restrict his search to hunting down the few people responsible, he caused the death of tens of thousands. There are many conflicting numbers of war casualties, but possibly there could be 50 Iraqi and Afghan deaths for each of the three thousand killed on 9 / 11. This is not my idea of justice.

or forming an ISIS equivalent

So if you lived in Iraq, your house had been destroyed, your son had been killed and you became one of the two million refugees that fled Iraq, would you just sit back and be happy? Don't look at religion being the problem, look at the injustice that happens. How will these ordinary people ever get justice for the deaths, loss of home, jobs and all the social infrastructure that they had before.

You could blame Saddam for all the injustice he did, but that would only be justifiable if we had not interfered. Our invasion puts most of the blame on America and its allies.

The most militant you'll see atheists get in the name of no-God is mocking your religion, drawing rude cartoons of your prophet,

If somebody publicly mocked your mother, wife and children in the same way, you might sit back and take it on the chin. But I can imagine some people becoming violent, if their wife, mother and children were publically ridiculed by rude cartoons.

In the spirit of praying for justice for all people.

Eric

[Karl]

The age of 18 isnt an atheist thing. Why would you think that? It is just one of many arbitrary age cutoffs that societies use. I am fairly certain most of these ages were chosen by Christians where I live, but I dont link it to religion.

The idea is that under a certain level of development (both physical andnin mental maturity) children are not able to understand and make some decisions for themselves. The actual point people become mature enough varies from person to person of course, and the numbers that are put into law are just used for the sake of consistency and uniformity so the laws can function.

You may know a 14 year old that hit puberty early and thinks and functions more maturely than most adults, but it is still illegal to let her drive your car and sex with her is still statutory rape.

That has nothing to do with atheism, and although Christians wrote those rules, probably has nothing to do with Christianity either. And I see absolutely no reason from lacking God belief why Atheists would be particularly adverse to changing the numbers up or down.

Oh, and the pope being an atheist is a funny thought.

There is nothing in the Bible about these age restrictions. They have come about by the progressive socialism of cultural Marxism which is atheist. These restrictions are pushed by the United Nations which is atheist. No true Christian could make these laws. The Soviet Union was heavily steeped in age restrictions mentality. In Christendom and Islam it is up to the father to decide any age restrictions (if any) imposed on his offspring. For a State to have age restrictions is socialist in attitude and most certainly a violation of parental sovereignty.

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you Pygoscelis;

I didn't need religion to feel a strong sense of empathy and fairness towards my fellow humans and other animals as well. And not having a religion to tell me what to think or believe, I had to think it through on a much deeper level,

I know you have a deep sense of justice for all people, but how deep do your thoughts take you on the subject of forgiveness?

Just over five years ago, at the young age of 62, I believe I was unfairly sacked from my job, of supporting people with a learning disability. Since being sacked, I have gone back to my old place of work hundreds of times, and done around fifteen hundred hours of voluntary work for them. I still come into contact with the people responsible for my demise. Next Friday, I shall go back and do another five hours, next week, I shall go back to my old place of work and voluntarily support two of their residents on a five day holiday. I also take this opportunity to have a break from the internet.

I think you are not giving yourself enough credit. I bet you would have developed your sense of humanity just as well. You would just see it in another context.

I believe the need to overcome anger and forgive, is where we find a profound sense of peace, I believe this can only come in our search for God. Being sacked at 62, pretty much place you on the employment scrapheap, but I found another job the next day. Very strange things kept happening, three people approached me and asked if I needed extra work with them, that has never happened before in my life.

A lady from the company that gave me the sack, came and asked me if I would like to work part time with her at another venue. So I have now been working four and a half years with the company that sacked me, I should have retired a couple of years ago. Sometimes life does not make sense.

In the spirit of praying for justice for all people,

Eric

[Pygoscelis]

Greetings and peace be with you Pygoscelis;



I know you have a deep sense of justice for all people, but how deep do your thoughts take you on the subject of forgiveness?

Just over five years ago, at the young age of 62, I believe I was unfairly sacked from my job, of supporting people with a learning disability. Since being sacked, I have gone back to my old place of work hundreds of times, and done around fifteen hundred hours of voluntary work for them. I still come into contact with the people responsible for my demise. Next Friday, I shall go back and do another five hours, next week, I shall go back to my old place of work and voluntarily support two of their residents on a five day holiday. I also take this opportunity to have a break from the internet.



I believe the need to overcome anger and forgive, is where we find a profound sense of peace, I believe this can only come in our search for God. Being sacked at 62, pretty much place you on the employment scrapheap, but I found another job the next day. Very strange things kept happening, three people approached me and asked if I needed extra work with them, that has never happened before in my life.

A lady from the company that gave me the sack, came and asked me if I would like to work part time with her at another venue. So I have now been working four and a half years with the company that sacked me, I should have retired a couple of years ago. Sometimes life does not make sense.

In the spirit of praying for justice for all people,

Eric

Well, as I said, you'd just see it in a different context. I had something similar happen last year.

A few years back I had my business partner / boss turn on me and try to ruin me as a lawyer. He tarnished my name with pretty much everybody, telling lies and blaming me for the failures of his inept son. I left thinking I could never practice law again. As it turns out one of his former clients who I had worked with remembered me well and hired me on as in house counsel. It turned into my current job, and the most rewarding job I've ever had. And as it turns out, my former boss who screwed me over was hurting for business and came back to the former client I now work for. We do a ton of business and send it out to various lawyers across Ontario. And it is my job now to decide what goes to who. I could very easily deny my former boss any business and send it all away to others, but I don't. I weigh it based on who I think will handle the particular matter best.

I don't blame Satan or demons or spirits for my former boss trying to ruin me. And I don't praise Gods or spirits of any sort for the new job. You and have had a similar experience and we simply interpret them differently.

[*charisma*]

Sorry I didn't go into detail with this thread, but I do think regardless of religion, we all have a conscience. That's just how we are created. Religion comes into play to fine tune our conscience because it's not clear-cut for everyone what they should do and what they shouldn't do, especially when it comes to our desires. A pedophile might know that having sex with a child is wrong, but he bases that on what? Is it because society does not condone it? Is it because law does not allow it? What makes us feel bad about something and not other things? What stops us from convincing ourselves that it's ok to do something wrong once as long as we don't do it again? You could say that someone who doesn't believe in God could still make the right decision, but what if he wants to give in SO badly and knows that there is really nothing that will stop him or punish him for it? What does someone in that situation do? If you don't believe you will be punished for doing something wrong whether here or in the afterlife, what will stop you from doing something you really want to do after your conscience has failed to stop you?

I took a course in criminology and for many individuals religion was rehabilitative for them and kept them away from committing crimes. But to have another human being tell us what is crime-worthy, what is morally wrong/right, what we can or cannot do, should or should not do..makes no sense to me at least. We either choose to live our lives by our own desire, by the laws of the land and the morals of society, or by religion.

[Serinity]

Any person with insight will know that Morality doesn't come from us. It comes from Allah SWT.

Cuz if all mankind came together and said "raping teenagers is moral" wouldn't make it moral. So our morals aren't from us, but it is from Allah SWT. It is in our fitrah, which Allah SWT made.

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you Pygoscelis;

Well, as I said, you'd just see it in a different context. I had something similar happen last year.

A few years back I had my business partner / boss turn on me and try to ruin me as a lawyer. He tarnished my name with pretty much everybody, telling lies and blaming me for the failures of his inept son. I left thinking I could never practice law again. As it turns out one of his former clients who I had worked with remembered me well and hired me on as in house counsel. It turned into my current job, and the most rewarding job I've ever had. And as it turns out, my former boss who screwed me over was hurting for business and came back to the former client I now work for. We do a ton of business and send it out to various lawyers across Ontario. And it is my job now to decide what goes to who.

I think it is a real test of character, to act fairly with the person who has screwed you over, especially if you find yourself in a position of power over them.

I could very easily deny my former boss any business and send it all away to others, but I don't. I weigh it based on who I think will handle the particular matter best.

This now sounds very much like natural selection, survival of the fittest and sound commercial sense. It is always best to be good to people on the way up the ladder, as we may meet them again should we fall down. This is not to take anything away from what you have done, many people in your position would have enjoyed screwing their former boss over, given the chance.

I don't blame Satan or demons or spirits for my former boss trying to ruin me. And I don't praise Gods or spirits of any sort for the new job. You and have had a similar experience and we simply interpret them differently.

There seem to be many false gods that need worshipping, money, power, lust and greed.

On the subject of the law, I believe the law should be there to protect poor people, but poor people cannot afford the services of lawyers, I wonder how just any law givers can be today.

In the spirit of praying for justice for all people.

Eric

[Serinity]

The reason why people worship money, lust, and greed is because they ignore God, or deny Him. It is in our Natural state which Allah SWT created us in to Worship Allah SWT. And if you do not fill your heart with The guidance of Allah SWT. you'll deprive yourself and start worshipping false gods, which bring nothing. you stand thereby confused.

[Pygoscelis]

Sorry I didn't go into detail with this thread, but I do think regardless of religion, we all have a conscience. That's just how we are created. Religion comes into play to fine tune our conscience because it's not clear-cut for everyone what they should do and what they shouldn't do, especially when it comes to our desires. A pedophile might know that having sex with a child is wrong, but he bases that on what? Is it because society does not condone it? Is it because law does not allow it? What makes us feel bad about something and not other things? What stops us from convincing ourselves that it's ok to do something wrong once as long as we don't do it again? You could say that someone who doesn't believe in God could still make the right decision, but what if he wants to give in SO badly and knows that there is really nothing that will stop him or punish him for it? What does someone in that situation do? If you don't believe you will be punished for doing something wrong whether here or in the afterlife, what will stop you from doing something you really want to do after your conscience has failed to stop you?

I took a course in criminology and for many individuals religion was rehabilitative for them and kept them away from committing crimes. But to have another human being tell us what is crime-worthy, what is morally wrong/right, what we can or cannot do, should or should not do..makes no sense to me at least. We either choose to live our lives by our own desire, by the laws of the land and the morals of society, or by religion.

I can see your point, but I can also see statistics in prison populations (where atheists are slightly UNDER represented, not over represented). I believe that human empathy as well as culture and keeping each other in line is what stops us from socially destructive action (what you would call evil), and I agree with you that if these fail to stop somebody then they are unlikely to be stopped. But I think they are unlikely to be stopped with or without religion. In some cases perhaps religion is something that will help keep people in line, but I think that idea is overplayed. Most often people rationalize their bad behaviour, and if they are religious, they often use religion to authorize it or try to justify it. Religious doctrine is vague enough and conflicting enough that people are able to feel backed by God while doing charity or while sawing off heads.

The real benefit of religious belief is the comfort that it provides. People lean on it for support and it can be quite useful for that. If you feel unloved or unworthy etc, and have no human social support system of friends or family, God is always there for you, loves you, wants a relationship with you, etc. This can comfort both those who do good and those who do bad. That guy who murdered his family will likely become a pariah for it in his community, may have the comfort of believing that God forgives him even if his community doesn't. I know some Christians, for example, that believe that Hitler could be in heaven if only he repented upon his death bed and accepted Jesus as his lord and saviour, etc. They have that get out of guilt and personal responsibility free card the rest of us don't.

[*charisma*]

No. Not in the slightest. In face most wars, even "religious wars", are started for non-religious reasons (ie, resources or power etc). Religion just makes them easier to wage and harder to stop. Look at Israel/Palestine conflict. There are factions within both Israel and Palestine that don't want the conflict to end, for selfish reasons, and the conflict has been made impossible to end due to religious reasons. Take religion out of the equation and there MAY be a chance for peace there. Fan the flames of religion and there is little hope for it.

There are many reasons I am not religious, and many reasons why I find most organized religions troublesome, but I'll skip that for now, and go through your post here, as you appear to have put some good effort into it and appear to be writing in good spirit, and you deserve a response.

This is false. The Palestinian/Israeli conflict has nothing to do with religion and everything to do with power. Israelis and Zionists are nonreligious, and I do in fact believe many of them to be atheists. They use religion because laymen would believe it's a religious conflict since there's holy ground there, whereas we know this is just propaganda to hide the fact that the West wants power in the Middle East and the only way to do that is by establishing their own country and supporting the zionists in the middle east.

This isn't true. I have seen numerous studies finding no difference, and others finding atheists to be underrepresented in prisons, but I figure that is because atheism correlates with higher education, wealth and intelligence (an easier life).

You'd imagine that atheists would be FAR more criminal than theists if we are to believe all of the stuff I hear from religious folks about how religion makes them more moral, etc. Some, yes even on this very forum, even tell me that without God you can't be moral. And yet jails are not overflowing with atheists, and all without threats or bribes or obedience to a church or God authority. Being good for the sake of being good: That is true morality.

The justice system is absolutely corrupt. Most of the time it's poverty and lack of practicing a religion that leads people into a life of crime. Poverty-stricken areas may have higher crime rates but that could just be because they are surveillanced more than suburban affluent communities (due to prejudice). So maybe we can't call those people "atheists" because they believe in God, but we can definitely say that whatever caused them to enter jail in the first place was due to immoral actions which is condemned in their religion. So they weren't practicing religion in the first place. Stealing, rape, killing, organized crime, whatever is all condemned in Islam, so if people are going to follow culture, why would any of these things be stopped if in their culture it's normal?

[Pygoscelis]

This is false. The Palestinian/Israeli conflict has nothing to do with religion and everything to do with power. Israelis and Zionists are nonreligious, and I do in fact believe many of them to be atheists. They use religion because laymen would believe it's a religious conflict since there's holy ground there, whereas we know this is just propaganda to hide the fact that the West wants power in the Middle East and the only way to do that is by establishing their own country and supporting the zionists in the middle east.

I don't think we are disagreeing here. The creation of Israel after the second world war was political. There are people on both sides of the conflict who fuel the conflict for reasons that are political. But they are able to do it so effectively because of religion. The use religion to push the hatred that each side feels towards the other. It is a great example of tribalism in action.

So maybe we can't call those people "atheists" because they believe in God, but we can definitely say that whatever caused them to enter jail in the first place was due to immoral actions which is condemned in their religion.

Maybe? We definitely can't call people atheists who believe in God. Atheists are people who don't. That is what "atheist" means. That is all that "atheist" means. You don't get to call anybody who does anything that violates your religion or that does something bad an "atheist"... that isn't what atheism is.

And no, we can not definitely say that whatever caused them to enter jail in the first place was actions condemned in their religion. You don't know their religion and one person's Islam or one persons Christianity can be completely different from another. I completely understand that your religion is entirely different than say daesh and that EricH's religion is entirely different than or fred phelps' hateful version of Christianity, but that doesn't make daesh or fred phelps any less religious.

So they weren't practicing religion in the first place.

You don't know that. The best you can say is that they were not practicing YOUR religion, or any other socially constructive one.

Stealing, rape, killing, organized crime, whatever is all condemned in Islam, so if people are going to follow culture, why would any of these things be stopped if in their culture it's normal?

It's normal? It most definitely is not normal to kill, rape, steal, engage in organized crime etc. To say it is normal would be an awfully dismal view of humanity, and the statistics show it to be nowhere near the norm.

[Serinity]

It is a false claim to say Religion causes war, hate, killings, and crimes. Humans cause these things, not religion.

Islam forbids killing people, stealing, robbing, raping, etc. Immoral words, etc.

[*charisma*]

I don't think we are disagreeing here. The creation of Israel after the second world war was political. There are people on both sides of the conflict who fuel the conflict for reasons that are political. But they are able to do it so effectively because of religion. The use religion to push the hatred that each side feels towards the other. It is a great example of tribalism in action.

Again, religion doesn't have anything to do with it. I don't hate jews because they're Jews. I hate them because they're Zionists. It's actually so ironic that the most liberal middle eastern countries (the levantine) are the ones being attacked. There's really no middle ground when it comes to religion with politicians...it's all about power. Religion doesn't push hatred, it wakes us up. It lets us know that it's ok to fight back if you're being persecuted in your own land, and it gives us hope that if we are killed protecting ourselves and our families that we did not die in vain. It'd be stupid to think otherwise. On what basis can love be established when you're being mercilessly killed, and living in a toxic environment, being tortured in literally every element of your life?? Get outta here with that. Give me alternative to "religion", give me a solution...and maybe you can change my mind. Zionists also don't really push the religious agenda as much as you'd think..they just push anything that works in their favor.

It's normal? It most definitely is not normal to kill, rape, steal, engage in organized crime etc. To say it is normal would be an awfully dismal view of humanity, and the statistics show it to be nowhere near the norm.

Exactly, but what defines normal? it's the lack of moral values/religious practice (abrahamaic) that leads people to do these things until it becomes a part of their enclosed society. What is normal for a gang is not normal in mainstream society. What's normal for prostitutes is not normal in mainstream society. Religion is what defines these values for us, but people often like to choose culture to do so..which then we fall back to people following their desires. So technically there's no set rule for what is normal and acceptable if there is no religion.

Maybe? We definitely can't call people atheists who don't believe in God. That is what "atheist" means. That is all that "atheist" means. You don't get to call anybody who does anything that violates your religion or that does something bad an "atheist"... that isn't what atheism is.

And no, we can not definitely say that whatever caused them to enter jail in the first place was actions condemned in their religion. You don't know their religion and one person's Islam or one persons Christianity can be completely different from another. I completely understand that your religion is entirely different than say daesh and that EricH's religion is entirely different than or fred phelps' hateful version of Christianity, but that doesn't make daesh or fred phelps any less religious.

I did want to clarify that I was referring to the Abrahamic faiths (sorry I thought I was a bit more obvious) and more specifically Islam, because if people did practice them, especially Islam, they wouldn't commit these types of crimes because they are condemned in these religions. I can't say that it's easy to misconstrue what the majority believes in and follows. It only becomes an issue when the individual wants to do evil for himself (selfish reasons) and justifies it with religion so that he can "feel good" about himself, so in essence it's still not a religious issue, it's an individual issue.