(November 8, 2009 at 3:44 pm)Scott Anonymous Wrote: [font=Arial]My argument for Religion is this: Do we Atheists, Agnostics and Secular Humanist’s have any right to attempt to rid them of their clearly misguided yet beneficial beliefs? It’s been proven very much so, that religion is not needed to change and benefit one’s own life. But this doesn’t mean someone is wrong and utterly corrupt because they found religion to do this for them. Religion is quite capable of changing someone’s life, even ask one of the participants. I have.
Scott, it is not that I object to a Christian having a belief or even benefiting from it. And no, it doesn’t mean someone is wrong and utterly corrupt because they found religion to do this for them.
The objection is that these folks simply cannot be satisfied unless they succeed in giving their beliefs the force of law. In doing so, they are trampling the rights of others who do not believe as they do. There is a big difference in these two concepts.
Since many lives are being damaged by them, I clearly have a right, indeed, an obligation to try to rid them of their clearly misguided beliefs. I would do that with education if possible, never by force.
And yes, most of them will not entertain evidence, so any effort to educate them is futile. Therefore, the focus of educational outreach must be those who still have a little objectivity left. I have found a few Christians still searching with an open mind.
Quote:When religion comes to mind, it’s not the belief itself which makes me cringe, it’s what it has the potential to do to people and what it can turn them into, people who center their reasoning on superstition and those who deny fact upon retrieval.
Yes, and what it turns them into is fascist.
