Not hiring someone on grounds of Religious belief

[geeser]

I think you better find the link to the William Ramsey that you have referred to, geeser. The one I am referring to was an archaeologist and not a theologian. If you read his biography it is not the same man you have illustrated above.

thank you for your reply but I'm losing the will to live.
I quite honestly could not give a toss whether ramsay was a theologian or not.
your never going to convince me that jesus ever lived, and your far to happy in your lunacy to know reality.

Maybe this list will do

no the list does not do.
read above statement. and jesus could not have existed, as the stories of such a person have been handed down over thousands of years and stolen from other religions, these stories can be traced back to Mithras and then theres the crucifixion
I live in the real world, I have an imagination like everybody, thus I know the difference between hallucination and reality.
so therefore we should beg to differ, cause as I've said I'm losing the will to live.

 

[SVRP]

thank you for your reply but I'm losing the will to live.
I quite honestly could not give a toss whether ramsay was a theologian or not.
your never going to convince me that jesus ever lived, and your far to happy in your lunacy to know reality.

Sorry about you losing your will to live, geeser, but if your perception to my responses are to convince you that Jesus lived, then you have given me too much credit. I am here to give a healthy debate to common misconceptions about God, religion, Jesus, etc. In fact wouldn’t you agree that your stance on “never going to convince” you about Jesus is exactly like what a closed minded zealous theist would say in regards to their “beliefs”? If you are a free-thinker then are you willing to explore the other side of the question, “Does God exist?”, in depth? Are you free to do that? Are you willing to be a “truth-seeker”? If not, then you are just as “religious” in your non-religious beliefs as a closed minded religious zealot.

jesus could not have existed, as the stories of such a person have been handed down over thousands of years and stolen from other religions, these stories can be traced back to Mithras and then theres the crucifixion

Unfortunately you are not knowledgeable about first century Judaism. Israel was a cultural island and resisted the spread of any foreign beliefs like the Mithra cult. First century Jews would not have wanted to model baptism and communion under any of its barbaric practices. According to most scholars it would be extremely implausible to derive any beginnings from a barbaric cult.

And why the cross … http://members.tripod.com/~robertwells/whythecross.html

Now a question for you to think about, geeser. Although written 300 years after the event, the Talmud, a source of Jewish apologetics, includes the reason for the execution of Jesus. If Jesus was not an actual historical figure, why did they include this in the Talmud? Shouldn’t they have said, “This Jesus professed by this Christian sect did not exist at all.” Or maybe they should have written nothing at all to prevent the perpetuation of a mythical figure. Why mention Jesus if He wasn’t an actual person?
http://www.sonic.net/sentinel/naij3.html
http://www.rense.com/general43/jesus.htm

I live in the real world, I have an imagination like everybody, thus I know the difference between hallucination and reality.

Good for you, geeser, and so do I. The difference is I am free to think on both sides of the debate but you are not. You are held a slave to one side and not really free to think about the other side. If you are a free-thinker then are you willing to explore the other side of the question? Are you willing to be a “truth-seeker”? If you were told you could experience a joy and peace that cannot be defined would you be willing to explore the other side of the question as an intelligent human being?

 

[geeser]

Sorry about you losing your will to live, geeser, but if your perception to my responses are to convince you that Jesus lived, then you have given me too much credit. I am here to give a healthy debate to common misconceptions about God, religion, Jesus, etc. In fact wouldn’t you agree that your stance on “never going to convince” you about Jesus is exactly like what a closed minded zealous theist would say in regards to their “beliefs”?

no, as I'm very open minded, in regard to reality, but I'm certainly closed minded if someone is trying prove fantasy is real.

If you are a free-thinker then are you willing to explore the other side of the question, “Does God exist?”, in depth?

yes, if it effects reality, and until such a time, as they can prove a god exists in reality, it must be taken on faith alone, and remain a fantasy.

Are you free to do that? Are you willing to be a “truth-seeker”?

of course, hence why I'm an atheist, I studied for a very long time, to get to where I am.

If not, then you are just as “religious” in your non-religious beliefs as a closed minded religious zealot.

how so, are you willing to believe in shiny blue polka dotted pink monkeys, who play the drums with a spanner, until such a time as someone has physical evidence of some, they must be taken on faith only.
I do not wish to give homage to non-existence that is infantile.
I'm not irrational.

Now a question for you to think about, geeser. Although written 300 years after the event, the Talmud, a source of Jewish apologetics, includes the reason for the execution of Jesus. If Jesus was not an actual historical figure, why did they include this in the Talmud? Shouldn’t they have said, “This Jesus professed by this Christian sect did not exist at all.” Or maybe they should have written nothing at all to prevent the perpetuation of a mythical figure. Why mention Jesus if He wasn’t an actual person?

have you read it thoroughly, I told you I studied for years, I was brought up christian, it was'nt an over night thing, your going against all you've been taught, and all your family and friends, to become an atheist, and I've yet to understand why the religious, deem themselves to be superior, just because I have the good sense to believe in reality, over fantasy.
The Talmud said a? Jesus existed, actually it says several jesus's exist, but nothing Even remotely linking The christianity's version of Jesus.

"I have lost the will to live."

The difference is I am free to think on both sides of the debate but you are not. You are held a slave to one side and not really free to think about the other side.

if by thinking you actually mean hallucinated, lets give it a softer word imagined reality, then my side is the rational side, the reasonable side, the logical side, the discerning side. the real side.

If you are a free-thinker then are you willing to explore the other side of the question?

of course, as long as it stays in reality, it would be infantile to accept, the other side if it was pure speculation, a baseless assumption.

Are you willing to be a “truth-seeker”?

(same question, same answer.)of course, hence why I'm an atheist, I studied for a very long time, to get to where I am.

If you were told you could experience a joy and peace that cannot be defined would you be willing to explore the other side of the question as an intelligent human being?

of course, if I dont have to lose my rationality, my senses, to do so.

 

[charles cure]

Many, probably most, religions hold reason in high esteem. Christianity, Hinduism, Judaism, each of these religions teaches that one of the beautiful distinctions between man and animal is intellect, rationality. The most brilliant men in history held religious beliefs. The greatest civilizations in history all held their own religious beliefs. Consider the monumental achievements of the Egyptians, which necessitated strong scientific understanding, who were also highly religious.

Humans are historically both religious and scientific. The two fields represent the two basic functions of the mind, which exist in every human mind. To deny someone employment based on the fact that they're religious is to deny that they're human. Moreover, it's a denial of a part of yourself.

First of all i would say that overall i disagree with not hiring someone based on religious belief. The reason i think, is that you can believe in a religion and still be a rational and logical person. ITs like when you go to a horror movie and get scared even though you know it isnt really happening, thats called suspension of disbelief. Its as illogical and irrational as religious belief, but most peopel feel it and deal with it and can partition it away from the other aspects of their lives.

That being said, i do think that believing in god is a lot like going to the horror movie and thinking getting scared even though it obviously cant hurt you. In fact the horror movie is probably way more reality based than the religious belief.

The problem i have with the statement i quoted is that i think beyondtimeandspace doesnt know much about religion. a lot of eastern religious beliefs are less dogmatic that christianity (take buddhism or zen buddhism or taoism for an example) and allow for freedom of thought and action with minimal restrictians based on rules established by their religion. more of a "find the way that works right for you" attitude as opposed to the judeo-christian "our way is the only way and youll go to hell if you dont get it" attitude (and yes i understand theres no hell in judaism).
To compare the egyptian religion to christianity is absolutely absurd. its apples and oranges. the ancient egyptians had a highly developed religious belief system and it was much more practical than that of christianity. all evidence points to the fact that ancient egyptians saw their gods and godesses as embodiments of different aspects of the human experience. although they may have been idealized versions, people worshipped the gods in order to gain knowledge of themselves with the aspiration of someday becoming Godlike in the way that they led their lives. communion with the divine archetype was meant to illuminate a path to transendence and divinity for the human who chose to follow it.

Christianity is a religion pinioned on fear and deprivation of divine knowledge. it relegates humanity to a lesser status of created and imperfect and only allows for us to try to save ourselves from condemnation, not become perfect and acheive a power greater than ourselves.

that is why i wouldnt hire someone who was say, an evangelical christian or a radical muslim, but i would hire a buddhist or a hindu.

whether its wrong or not, who cares, in the US and the UK the law is an arbitrary manifestation of political power and majoritarian shortsightedness, not a bastion of morality. lets not fool ourselves.

 

[Oli]

The reason i think, is that you can believe in a religion and still be a rational and logical person

But that's the point, by having faith in a unproven (and unprovable) deity the faith holder is thereby demonstrating a lack of logic and rationality.
The fact that we are not allowed, by law, to refuse a job to someone on those grounds is a measure of how entrenched religion is in society, so much so that faith is not even questioned, it's just accepted.