Posts: 3634
Threads: 20
Joined: July 20, 2011
Reputation:
47
RE: The Not-so-elephant In The Room
December 11, 2015 at 7:12 pm
(This post was last modified: December 11, 2015 at 7:15 pm by Simon Moon.)
(December 11, 2015 at 6:44 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: (December 11, 2015 at 6:19 pm)Simon Moon Wrote: Because ones beliefs don't live in a vacuum. Your beliefs inform your actions.
The fact that you already hold un-evidenced, irrational beliefs, pollutes your mind and makes you more susceptible to buy into further un-evidenced and irrational beliefs.
Many moderates among every religion, given the right circumstances, or maybe the right charismatic leader, can be radicalized.
The fact that you seem to be quite moderate, does not change the fact that calling yourself a Catholic, gives passive approval for the more radical among those that also label themselves as "Catholic". When the leaders of your church make idiotic statements, like, condoms cause the spread of aids in Africa, whether you like it or not, your belonging to that church is passively supportive of statements like that.
I'm not "moderate" at all. I'm a devout, practicing Catholic and I agree with and stand by all the doctrinal teachings of the Church.
Including the fact that there is zero evidence to support the Catholic Church's claim that using condoms spread aids?! And mountains of evidence to support the fact that condoms reduce the spread of aids?
And you ask how your beliefs make the world a worse place?
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
Posts: 137
Threads: 3
Joined: December 9, 2015
Reputation:
3
RE: The Not-so-elephant In The Room
December 11, 2015 at 7:13 pm
(This post was last modified: December 11, 2015 at 7:14 pm by Amine.)
(December 11, 2015 at 6:43 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: (December 11, 2015 at 6:09 pm)Amine Wrote: I don't know what you believe so I can only guess. That's why I gave the abortion example. Your effect on the world depends on what is true. If you oppose abortion and it turns out that atheism is true, wouldn't you agree that you are making the world a worse place for people who want to get abortions? I know you have good intentions, but don't you think that believing in true things matters as to which decisions a person should make?
Believing in truth matters, but I just think your approach to this is very black and white - "Either someone is making the world a worst place, or they are making it a better place."
Sometimes we do things that are good, sometimes we do things that are not so good. This applies to every single person on earth. Even the best person is not perfect. I feel like having the attitude that "so and so is making the world a worst place because they are atheist, or because they are Christian, or whatever", is very small minded. We all contribute in good ways sometimes and in bad ways sometimes. In extreme cases we'll get people who are very bad and who's bad actions far outweigh whatever good they did - like Hitler. But that is the exception I think. I think most people are good people trying to live honest, good lives.
I think it is unhealthy to be so concerned with whether or not another person believes in God. Everyone brings good and bad to the world regardless of what religion they are.
I never said "Either someone is making the world a worst place, or they are making it a better place." I am saying that what we believe about specific matters makes our decisions better or worse. Believing in things that aren't true means we act on bad information, even if our intentions are good.
I'm looking at a specific belief here, the belief in God. Should we believe it or not? If it isn't true, we shouldn't believe it. This has nothing to do with the sum total of all of the other beliefs a person holds, which are also important but not the topic of discussion right now. "No one is perfect" is not a case for neglecting to examine individual beliefs.
You have said that believing in true things does matter. That's why we should care. If either of our beliefs are wrong, there are consequences. If Catholicism is true, I want to know it. I don't want to just shut people down and tell them to not bother trying to explain to me why I might be mistaken. That would be the cause not only of poor consequences, but stagnation.
Posts: 43162
Threads: 720
Joined: September 21, 2008
Reputation:
133
RE: The Not-so-elephant In The Room
December 11, 2015 at 7:15 pm
(December 11, 2015 at 6:44 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I'm not "moderate" at all. I'm a devout, practicing Catholic and I agree with and stand by all the doctrinal teachings of the Church.
Are you against contraception?
Posts: 67206
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
162
RE: The Not-so-elephant In The Room
December 11, 2015 at 7:19 pm
(This post was last modified: December 11, 2015 at 7:24 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
(December 11, 2015 at 6:44 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I'm not "moderate" at all. I'm a devout, practicing Catholic and I agree with and stand by all the doctrinal teachings of the Church.
No you don't....lol. You don't even know what they are. Go..right now, no looking, list all the doctrinal teachings of the church. Save ridiculous statements like that for congregations of your fellow godbotherers.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Posts: 15452
Threads: 147
Joined: June 15, 2015
Reputation:
88
RE: The Not-so-elephant In The Room
December 11, 2015 at 7:19 pm
(December 11, 2015 at 7:12 pm)Simon Moon Wrote: (December 11, 2015 at 6:44 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I'm not "moderate" at all. I'm a devout, practicing Catholic and I agree with and stand by all the doctrinal teachings of the Church.
Including the fact that there is zero evidence to support the Catholic Church's claim that condoms spread aids?! And mountains of evidence to support the fact that condoms reduce the spread of aids?
And you ask how your beliefs make the world a worse place?
Condoms spreading aids is not a doctrinal teaching, Simon Moon.
And besides, I'm not quite sure how it went down and what the person who said it meant. But I'm willing to bet he didn't mean it like wearing a condom makes you get aids, but rather, that the safest thing to do is to abstain. And that relying on a condom is dangerous because they have a failure rate. On that, I agree with 100%.
Being Catholic doesn't mean I agree with everything every Catholic person ever says. Even if it's the pope, unless he is making an infallible pronouncement which never happens. Being Catholic means I believe and accept the doctrinal teachings of the Church, which are official teachings on faith and morals.
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
-walsh
Posts: 15452
Threads: 147
Joined: June 15, 2015
Reputation:
88
RE: The Not-so-elephant In The Room
December 11, 2015 at 7:32 pm
(December 11, 2015 at 7:15 pm)Evie Wrote: (December 11, 2015 at 6:44 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I'm not "moderate" at all. I'm a devout, practicing Catholic and I agree with and stand by all the doctrinal teachings of the Church.
Are you against contraception?
I agree with the Church that they are not a moral means of avoiding pregnancy. However, I don't think they should be illegal or anything like that.
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
-walsh
Posts: 3
Threads: 0
Joined: December 11, 2015
Reputation:
0
RE: The Not-so-elephant In The Room
December 11, 2015 at 8:02 pm
Most religious people don't see God as "magic", that is your term.
A typical religious person can still differentiate between obvious lies.
Religion is not an obvious lie because it has thousands of years of teachings behind it.
Posts: 137
Threads: 3
Joined: December 9, 2015
Reputation:
3
RE: The Not-so-elephant In The Room
December 11, 2015 at 8:23 pm
(December 11, 2015 at 8:02 pm)Newton66 Wrote: Most religious people don't see God as "magic", that is your term.
A typical religious person can still differentiate between obvious lies.
Religion is not an obvious lie because it has thousands of years of teachings behind it.
Magic and religion aren't different. What unites them is their ad hoc working. There is no "how" behind it. There's really no difference between casting a spell and saying a prayer. You say the words, and the thing happens by no discernible mechanism. Same with superstition. What, exactly, is the difference between rubbing a rabbit's foot and splashing a baby with water? There isn't one. They are both superstitious practices. The difference is purely cultural.
The fact that something has had thousands of years of teachings behind it doesn't make it not an obvious lie. Of course some guy didn't put every kind of animal on a boat in a worldwide flood. Of course some guy didn't fly to heaven on a winged horse. Of course people don't rise from the dead after 3 days. That's blatant. It's no different from knowing that of course there wasn't a thunder god named Zeus or a guy who delivers presents to a billion children on Christmas Eve. These are myths. The ones that someone isn't raised with are transparently so to that person. Even being raised with them, all it takes is a little honesty.
Posts: 3634
Threads: 20
Joined: July 20, 2011
Reputation:
47
RE: The Not-so-elephant In The Room
December 11, 2015 at 8:33 pm
(December 11, 2015 at 8:02 pm)Newton66 Wrote: Most religious people don't see God as "magic", that is your term.
A typical religious person can still differentiate between obvious lies.
Religion is not an obvious lie because it has thousands of years of teachings behind it.
Sorry, but the gods of all regions perform 'magic'. The god character in the Bible 'speaks' the universe into being. If that is not a magic incantation, what is it?
How does one differentiate between a ridiculous supernatural claim, and an obvious lie?
Remember, almost every religion claims that other religions contain lies.
The fact that religions have been around for 1000's means nothing.
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
Posts: 3
Threads: 0
Joined: December 11, 2015
Reputation:
0
RE: The Not-so-elephant In The Room
December 11, 2015 at 8:51 pm
(This post was last modified: December 11, 2015 at 8:56 pm by Newton66.)
(December 11, 2015 at 8:23 pm)Amine Wrote: (December 11, 2015 at 8:02 pm)Newton66 Wrote: Most religious people don't see God as "magic", that is your term.
A typical religious person can still differentiate between obvious lies.
Religion is not an obvious lie because it has thousands of years of teachings behind it.
Magic and religion aren't different. What unites them is their ad hoc working. There is no "how" behind it. There's really no difference between casting a spell and saying a prayer. You say the words, and the thing happens by no discernible mechanism. Same with superstition. What, exactly, is the difference between rubbing a rabbit's foot and splashing a baby with water? There isn't one. They are both superstitious practices. The difference is purely cultural.
The fact that something has had thousands of years of teachings behind it doesn't make it not an obvious lie. Of course some guy didn't put every kind of animal on a boat in a worldwide flood. Of course some guy didn't fly to heaven on a winged horse. Of course people don't rise from the dead after 3 days. That's blatant. It's no different from knowing that of course there wasn't a thunder god named Zeus or a guy who delivers presents to a billion children on Christmas Eve. These are myths. The ones that someone isn't raised with are transparently so to that person. Even being raised with them, all it takes is a little honesty.
I'm on your side mate, but I still wouldn't compare religion to magic. The reason why people bevieve in God will not be understood on this forum because you hold a bias.
|
