Scientology

[Daxx]

it won't shake my belief in the correct religion, which should be science and nothing else. ... That's the point. We should ignore religion and embrace something more human - science.

SCIENCE BE PRAISED

Seriously, what the fuck. Science isn't a religion. You can follow the scientific method, but in no way is "science" a philosophy that you can follow any more than "blue" or "tree" is a philosophy.

Also, behaving like atheism is your religion is retarded. People who do that are the reason why religious people complain about atheistic zealots who behave just as dogmatically and with blind faith as they do.

[Anna]

Meh. I don't care what people believe, as long as people aren't harmed because of such beliefs. If they are, then something is very wrong.

I'd agree with this completely, except for one thing: Almost every religion, if not every single one, ever, has commited all sorts of atrocities in the name of said religion, or due to the teachings of said religion. So while I have nothing against personal beliefs, I'm very wary and distrustful of any sort of organised religion.

Scientology exploits its followers, tries to actively discredit and even in some cases, imprison those who speak out against it. Some Mormon sects engage in polygamy, forcing young girls to marry old men. In America, Christianity is responsible for nonsense like "abstinance only" sex education, where they not only completely misinform teenagers of things like contraception, but they don't tell them about any of the REAL risks, or how to protect against them. Christianity was responsible for the Klan, and for laws like those in Texas which BAN marital aids. That last one isn't actually isn't harmful to anyone (except the poor sods who get in trouble for having dildos), but it's a perfect example of the religious forcing their religious beliefs on everyone else.

In countries like Kenya and certain places in Africa, religious and superstitious beliefs are getting old men and women burnt to death for witchcraft, or newborn babies being declared as witches by Evangelical pastors, and subsequently abandoned, discarded or killed. All of that is happening RIGHT NOW.

As to Islam, I don't think I really need to say anything about that.

So, yeah. I'm okay with personal beliefs, like "I believe in a God, and a Heaven, and all that good stuff". I know plenty of people who believe that sort of thing, and I get along with them just fine, even though I don't share said beliefs. I'm not okay with Creationist Pseudoscience being taught in schools as real science. It's theology. I'm not okay with the religious making laws based soley on their religious beliefs that the rest of us need to follow, or be punished for. And I'm certainly not okay with anyone who thinks its okay to KILL in the name of their religion, and so many people seem to think this, sadly.

[Master Chief]

Seriously, what the fuck. Science isn't a religion. You can follow the scientific method, but in no way is "science" a philosophy that you can follow any more than "blue" or "tree" is a philosophy.

Fine. Then take it that I am guided by scientific thinking, and not by religion.

Also, behaving like atheism is your religion is retarded. People who do that are the reason why religious people complain about atheistic zealots who behave just as dogmatically and with blind faith as they do.

Then how the hell should atheists behave? We have to stick to our most fundamental belief - religion does not exist. And we have to defend that belief "just as dogmatically and with blind faith" as others who do believe in any religion.

[Anna]

Also, behaving like atheism is your religion is retarded. People who do that are the reason why religious people complain about atheistic zealots who behave just as dogmatically and with blind faith as they do.

Then how the hell should atheists behave? We have to stick to our most fundamental belief - religion does not exist. And we have to defend that belief "just as dogmatically and with blind faith" as others who do believe in any religion.

Religion does exist, though. There are plenty of religions.

And your whole statement is flawed. We don't need to defend our belief dogmatically and with blind faith. That goes completely AGAINST the scientific method. If actual, credible proof of god's existence was offered, any rational atheist would take said proof, examine it, and if there was a way of determining that it was valid, scientific method would say we need to accept it.

Blind faith and irrational dogma don't have ANY place in atheism. We have logic on our side. That's more than enough.

[Master Chief]

Blind faith and irrational dogma don't have ANY place in atheism. We have logic on our side. That's more than enough.

Point conceded. Damn, that's the second time today I've succumbed to logical fallacy.

[T-002]

I can, and only will say one thing about Scientology:

They took Danny Masterson. This is unforgivable.

[TheBlueEcho]

What about JW's? (JW = Jehovah's Witnesses)

[ChaosTheory]

Oi. Religion again . . .

I'd first like to note that you could just as easily interpret a lot of scientific evidence in favor of there being a God. Not necessarily the god of any religion we know, but a god. You just don't want a god, so you don't see it. Have you ever read any of Stephen Hawking's books? He constantly toys with both sides of the line, and makes some valid arguments either way. Science and god are not incompatible, they both need refinement to become more accurate theories.

Secondly, Master Chief, go away. You exhibit the same follow-the-media mentality that brought us the Dark Ages and the Nazis, both products of corrupt religion. You don't particularly seem to have thought about it, you just go with whatever anyone else is saying.

Thirdly, I hate large organized religions with a passion, for screwing up large portions of human history and leading to thousands of deaths, not to mention defacing the name of what I see as a beneficial concept to mankind. However, I'd like you to note that the same can be said for governments, including capitalist democracy. In theory, they work great and make people happier. In practice, they are filled with corrupt people, money, and war. I'm glad we don't have religion in our governments anymore (trouble squared), but I can't say religion is a bad thing overall - studies show that religious people are happier, and many of the original teachings of the many holy men are excellent good advice.

I think that amounts to as balanced a post as I can manage before I leave. I'll fix it up later.

[Master Chief]

Secondly, Master Chief, go away. You exhibit the same follow-the-media mentality that brought us the Dark Ages and the Nazis, both products of corrupt religion. You don't particularly seem to have thought about it, you just go with whatever anyone else is saying.

I exhibit the exact mentality which will also allows science to advanced at a faster rate without those religious groups calling for stops to things which "contradict their dogma"! And so what if I post a similar opinion after someone does? I'm stating down my point of view, my opinion, my two cents' on the issue. There's nothing wrong with that. Nothing wrong which I can see. My view on this is that religion doesn't really have an overall beneficial effect on humanity, it is useless when compared to science, logic, and atheism. Plainly believing in something existing is not as good as proving it to exist beyond any reasonable doubt. Many human beings do the previous: misguided and in their own cocoon of weaved lies, they presume, presume, assert, assert, and worst of all, believe so deeply in things which haven't been proved to exist just yet. Some even go as far to harm others because of their beliefs. That's what I think no one can tolerate.

I'll back down here and sulk in the corner, but I'll take into account your words as feedback. Thanks ChaosTheory.

[ArcaneDude]

My two cents on religion;

I too believe that blind faith in a dogmatic rulebook such as the Bible and others isn't very logical. However, for me, there is a difference between that, and what you see when you look past all the dogma's and see those books for what they were originally supposed to be; metaphores. Of course, in things like Genesis, even I have trouble doing so, but then again, maybe that's simply an old, easier to chew interpretation of what we now know as the big bang, the creation of our universe. Besides, most of the passages don't describe such things at all, a lot of them are about commonly (or at least they should be) accepted subjects; Forgiveness, love, friendship. All those things we see as good.

Another thing: interpretation. Sure, the Quran preaches violence. But only if you interpret it that way. Islamic religion isn't all about the Quran. The Islam holy scriptures are comprised of numerous books: the Quran, the scrolls of the Thora, and even the old testament. They even believe in Jesus, just not that he's the son of God. Long ago, Islamic leadership chose (or it just grew that way) to see the Quran as a law instead of a guideline, what it really is, and that's largely an indirect cause for the problems now.

Same thing with the Crusades. The bible sais 'get rid of God's enemies', or at least implicitly, which is supposedly free for interpretation. But how? Does one slaughter them all, or does one try to live together with them, so that they are no longer God's enemies? Long ago, leaders acroos Europe chose for the former, leading to bloodshed. But was it the Bible that told them to? Or did they see it that way?

The sience issue is quite similar. Does the Bible say 'halt all science'? It doesn't. That is simply the interpretation of all those catholic leaders. And, I must admit, for example, on something as stemcell investigation, where do we draw the line? Right now, stemcells are being pulled out of the leftovers from in-vitro fertilisation. Meaning that we take cells from foetuses that we have to kill in the process. They would never have been used, that's also true, but yet again, where do we draw the line? That's just an example though, there are plenty of things that Popes and the curch have absolutely no good reason for blocking. Yet again, see above. Interpretation.

[Daxx]

Okay, I think it's time that everyone got the fuck back on topic.

[Onibaku]

For those who like to read old school sci fi, I recommend the short story Master Zacharias by Jules Verne. It has a very nice commentary on the relationship between science and religion.

Verne shows in the story how mankind actually needs both to survive. The ideal balance between the two will allow science to continue to develop new technologies, and for religion to act as a pressure valve on science. Religion should hold back science just enough for people to adapt to new tech and learn to use it responsibly. Without science, society will stagnate under religious dogma. Without religion, society will find itself at risk of collapsing from those who can't use technology in an appropriate manner.

[TheBlueEcho]

The Bible dose not say "Get rid of gods enemys".

[AidanAdv]

It is a scam. I'd go out and protest if I had enough people and knew where their nearest ban... I mean church is.

[T-002]

It is a scam. I'd go out and protest if I had enough people and knew where their nearest ban... I mean church is.

What is? The bible or Scientology?

Sorry, it's just a bit unclear.