"With or without religion.." Quote. Is Weinberg wrong?

[dyresand]

No. It is the zealots ability to use religion to inflame the masses that is the problem.

Religion is the biggest issue with humanity. Religion is fine but the Abrahamic religions are the ones that cause to much trouble and tend to make out the world a terrible place and is going to end.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Zealotry is the culprit. It takes a zealot -- Christian, Communist, Muslim, whatever -- it takes a zealot to justify evil with ideology.

Indeed, however the zealots feed off the popular support of the grassroots majority. Take away the implicit blessing that zealotry requires and the religious maniacs become ordinary everyday maniacs.

Taking off the uniform doesn't make a soldier a civilian.

[Ryantology]

The point still applies. There are secular arguments against gay marriage.

...just no good ones.

God dammit Paladin, atheism is a religion. Stick to your lines. Don't blaspheme the secular argument. We all agree with whatever it is because it's secular, remember?

[Thumpalumpacus]

No. It is the zealots ability to use religion to inflame the masses that is the problem.

I disagree. The masses aren't inflamed, or else we'd call them zealots. We call them moderates because they're not extremists.

Zealots use the religion as cover, or justification, but generally speaking they have a difficult time maintaining their own numbers, much less inflaming masses of people. The critical mass for revolutionary or extremist rhetoric to catch hold is actually pretty high, I think.

[dyresand]

No. It is the zealots ability to use religion to inflame the masses that is the problem.

I disagree. The masses aren't inflamed, or else we'd call them zealots. We call them moderates because they're not extremists.

Zealots use the religion as cover, or justification, but generally speaking they have a difficult time maintaining their own numbers, much less inflaming masses of people. The critical mass for revolutionary or extremist rhetoric to catch hold is actually pretty high, I think.

Zealots are on the loosing ground first world countries are pretty much loosing religion at a good pace more churches are closing than opening. so i guess its time to raise the banner of secularism?

[Thumpalumpacus]

Zealots are on the loosing ground first world countries are pretty much loosing religion at a good pace more churches are closing than opening. so i guess its time to raise the banner of secularism?

You can raise whatever you wish. I won't march under the banner of any -ism.

[dyresand]

Zealots are on the loosing ground first world countries are pretty much loosing religion at a good pace more churches are closing than opening. so i guess its time to raise the banner of secularism?

You can raise whatever you wish. I won't march under the banner of any -ism.

Fine fine but in the end education always rises above idiocracy and the dumb. The problem with all religions is they need to update or face the inevitability of being outdated even more and then tossed aside.

[Simon Moon]

Zealotry is the culprit. It takes a zealot -- Christian, Communist, Muslim, whatever -- it takes a zealot to justify evil with ideology.

Not just a zealot, but a zealot that is motivated by bad dogma and doctrine.

[Heywood]

I think the point that Weinberg was trying to make is that you take someone who normally does good things and expose him to religion (and probably of some extremist variety) and you'll see him start to do bad things. I don't think he means that the person doing bad things is still a good person.

I do agree with you, folks ought to be judged good or evil based on their actions, not their words.

It seems Weinberg is not familiar with Zimbardo's prison experiment. It is pretty easy to get otherwise good people to do bad things without religion.

[robvalue]

I would say religion makes it easier for people to justify and get away with various evil things. Of course it's not the only enabler, or the only justification used. Some people are just plain evil, and don't need any justification.