(January 8, 2013 at 8:58 pm)Surtr Wrote:People slaughter each other over lots of things but when someone looks at the causes without bias there are very few wars where religion was the prime cause. Not justifying war for any cause with that statement.(January 8, 2013 at 8:48 pm)Mark 13:13 Wrote: I can pray the The Holy Spirit allows them to be open to persuasion
Almost every atheist is open to persuasion. Theists are just unable to present an argument convincing enough to change their viewpoint.
Quote:just seeing that it may have some value in their life at another level be it emotional or psychological and through experience of that value being realised they come to believe as I do without the over riding need for proofs. Not everything needs to be proved true or false and depending on the situation then use appropriate tools.
You're not thinking rationally. Whether a religion gives me some sort of emotional or psychological value (none do) is irrelevant and does not change their truth value. Believing in a deity simply because it makes you feel all warm inside is not a valid argument. And not everything needs to be proved true or false? So, when people slaughter others over religion, it's alright? When the religious try to halt the teaching of science to our children, it's alright? When politicians try to bring religion into politics, it's alright?
Religion must have had some value both to individuals and society as otherwise it would never have evolved or have become extinct as a function surely long before now. What that value was and is can be discussed.
The last 2 questions , no its not alright, its the interference of one group into the domain of another by some religious who don't even represent the vast majority of Theists and without cause as they are free to explain their Religious beliefs to their children why is it the schools job, thats not the function of school. Likewise with government ; individuals cannot ignore their religious beliefs and will form their opinions based on this and other factors but on taking the post they have to balance their personal opinions with their role as representing the electorate in relation to the issue being discussed and the application in practice in government but they should have no direct part to play in government itself. I don't have all or even most of the answers. But I would like to hope that I could and should work with others even those who disagree with me to try an improve things.
