Is religion a sign of mental weakness?

[FeenixRizin]

Quote from traderNik:

Absolutely + 1.

The point that the believers in the Flying Spaghetti Monster conveniently fail to grasp is this. They are welcome to believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster as long as they don't try to make public legislation based on those beliefs.

Time and time again, however, we see the religious right pushing their faith-based agenda onto everyone, asking as to live by a set of rules which is informed by their belief in the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Denying a young woman's right to control her own destiny by controlling her body is Spaghetti God's way. Women who like to sleep with other women are sinners because Spaghetti God says they are, and if two women who have been together for years and are more stable than 80% of straight couples married in Spaghetti God's house want to adopt a child, they can't because... well, because the Flying Spaghetti Monster said they can't. The examples go on and on.

Religious zealots like certain members on these boards should keep their religion behind closed doors. We live in a society that is secular in its public face.

you must get that alot ... People Detesting You....

typical liberal-democrat ... (ie; socialist fascist)

Idiot

 

[stu]

Quote from traderNik:

Absolutely + 1.

The point that the believers in the Flying Spaghetti Monster conveniently fail to grasp is this. They are welcome to believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster as long as they don't try to make public legislation based on those beliefs.

Time and time again, however, we see the religious right pushing their faith-based agenda onto everyone, asking as to live by a set of rules which is informed by their belief in the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Denying a young woman's right to control her own destiny by controlling her body is Spaghetti God's way. Women who like to sleep with other women are sinners because Spaghetti God says they are, and if two women who have been together for years and are more stable than 80% of straight couples married in Spaghetti God's house want to adopt a child, they can't because... well, because the Flying Spaghetti Monster said they can't. The examples go on and on.

Religious zealots like certain members on these boards should keep their religion behind closed doors. We live in a society that is secular in its public face.

Good argument well said

 

[hermit]

Quote from OPTIONAL777:

If you claim something, why do I need to have your claimed proved to me?

It is a personal faith of yours, that's fine.

No one that I have read recently denies their faith in God is a personal faith...

No theist that I have read recently denies actual indisputable facts in evidence...

Anyone who makes a claim saying that their reality is the correct reality for anyone else has a burden of proof, but personal faith?

Has someone water-boarded you demanding that you agree with their personal faith?

I don't understand what riles people like you up so much when people pronounce their personal faith...

So what if they say your own faith is wrong? Why would you care?

My issue has never been with the personal faith of atheists, they should be given the same opportunity to deny God as theists have the opportunity to accept God...

The issue for me is the prickly nature of the atheists who demand something from theists in the form of "acceptable proof" when they themselves have personal faith and beliefs which they refuse to accept are equally without proof...

I wasn't disputing whether people should have faith or whether they should prove it to the disbelievers etc, people are free to believe in anything they like and have personal faith in whatever gives them comfort.

BUT, its different to assert that since the non-believers do not have proof of the non-existence what is claimed then they should be accepting of what is claimed.

 

[hermit]

Quote from TraderZones:

Belief in God permeates every major culture ever uncovered,and evidence of this goes back thousands of years. Yet not a single animal (regardless of how intelligent) ever left evidence of obvious religious belief.

Hardly equivalent to a single person making a claim of vampires.

But if someone claims God does not exist, does the burden of proof fall on the person making the claim?

Evidence of "belief in God among every culture" is not the same as Evidence of "God" itself. There have been cultures that have believed some really absurd things, does that prove that their beliefs were rational.

And yes, the burden of proof always falls on the person making the claim. What exactly is the atheist denying if the thing claimed is only a matter of faith.

 

[Wallet]

Quote from traderNik:

Denying a young woman's right to control her own destiny by controlling her body

What about the rights of the baby, why do you deny it's right to exist?

The debate has absolutely nothing to do with a women's control over her body, and everything to do with the rights of the unborn child.

 

[Index piker]

Quote from traderNik:

Absolutely + 1.

1)The point that the believers in the Flying Spaghetti Monster conveniently fail to grasp is this. They are welcome to believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster as long as they don't try to make public legislation based on those beliefs.

2)Religious zealots like certain members on these boards should keep their religion behind closed doors. We live in a society that is secular in its public face.

What a load of crap.

1)Don't kid yourself that your beliefs or personal philosophy is evidence based.

All of your other specific arguments are equally vapid as persons who hold contradictory views do not require belief in the flying spaghetti monster to oppose.

2) Likewise you should keep your personal opinions and philosophy behind closed doors based upon your claims about society.

 

[acronym]

Quote from OPTIONAL777:

Why is there a need for proof of one's faith to another person query into that of one's personal faith?

Because if they are wrong, they are wrong, you asshat.
If you are wrong, you are wrong, asshat.

 

[stu]

Quote from Wallet:

What about the rights of the baby, why do you deny it's right to exist?

The debate has absolutely nothing to do with a women's control over her body, and everything to do with the rights of the unborn child.

The rights of of the baby are protected .

Unfortunately the debate has nothing to do with an unborn child and everything to do with moral and ethical issues in regard to principle rights of the mother and her fetus.

 

[OPTIONAL777]

"BUT, its different to assert that since the non-believers do not have proof of the non-existence what is claimed then they should be accepting of what is claimed."

So what if someone says you should accept what they claim?

Are you being required to accept their claim? Are they going to penalize you if you don't accept their claim? I don't think there is a Spanish Inquisition going on these days in America forcing people to adopt or accept the personal faith of others...is there?

Why not just laugh it off?

Or just say, "I am happy for you and your faith, and as long as it doesn't interfere with my own faith, everything is cool."

Quote from hermit:

I wasn't disputing whether people should have faith or whether they should prove it to the disbelievers etc, people are free to believe in anything they like and have personal faith in whatever gives them comfort.

BUT, its different to assert that since the non-believers do not have proof of the non-existence what is claimed then they should be accepting of what is claimed.

 

[OPTIONAL777]

So you know what is right or wrong about the unknown?

That ass hat sure looks good on you chimp...

Quote from acronym:

Because if they are wrong, they are wrong, you asshat.
If you are wrong, you are wrong, asshat.