Religion Just Sucks Hairy Balls and then Some

[S.A.M.]

An excuse to insert a strawman argument?

You jumped to ludicrous speed and went plaid.

Four of the five security council countries would not describe themselves as overtly religious. At least the people making the policy decisions would not.

What then drives the arms trade by these countries?

PS do try to keep up.

 

[superluminal]

Right.

And the scientists who design the missiles, cluster bombs, nuclear weapons, for "the pleasure of finding things out"?

What do they believe the people funding this research intend it for?

What did they "find out" in process of building the 20,000 plus nuclear weapons present in the one country that used it (and made presumably after the first or second use of this weapon)?

What was the educational aim of those scientists?

Science is method. Scientists are people. People build weapons for many reasons. You rail against the military activities of the west (really the US of EVIL) yet forget that if we hadn't succeded against nazi germany before they completed their development, it's entirely likely you'd be in a much less happy world.

People (sheeple) will follow their leaders. And people will always use technology to make weapons to better defend themselves and to conquer richer territories. Weapons technology started with the first rock used as in anger.

I imagine you blame the greeks (for originating the idea of the atom) for our current nuclear stockpile.

Ideas are dangerous. Ideas in the hands of people who are certain that god wants them to use their ideas to serve "his" purpose are deadly.

The arms race has nothing to do with anything other than human nature. Science holds out hope of moving beyond this someday. Religion holds hope of nothing more than a better life when you're dead.

 

[superluminal]

Seems to me if we go by Dawkins theory that politicians are only playing at being religious and accept that most scientists are atheists, it is the atheists who seem bent on the destruction of the world.

Sorry you feel this way. Please hop into your time machine and go back to the good 'ol days of pre-science and technology.

Enjoy your short, brutish life.

 

[S.A.M.]

Science is method. Scientists are people. People build weapons for many reasons. You rail against the military activities of the west (really the US of EVIL) yet forget that if we hadn't succeded against nazi germany before they completed their development, it's entirely likely you'd be in a much less happy world.

People (sheeple) will follow their leaders. And people will always use technology to make weapons to better defend themselves and to conquer richer territories. Weapons technology started with the first rock used as in anger.

I imagine you blame the greeks (for originating the idea of the atom) for our current nuclear stockpile.

Ideas are dangerous. Ideas in the hands of people who are certain that god wants them to use their ideas to serve "his" purpose are deadly.

The arms race has nothing to do with anything other than human nature. Science holds out hope of moving beyond this someday. Religion holds hope of nothing more than a better life when you're dead.

Let me put it another way.

Religion has been around since all known history of humanity.

Are we suffering from a danger of extinction? Have we at any period of ALL that time?

Now look at the technological developments of the last 100 years.

How many people have died as a result of the improvement in technology?

Can we today, make the human race extinct if there is a world war? Why and how?

 

[superluminal]

Four of the five security council countries would not describe themselves as overtly religious. At least the people making the policy decisions would not.

What then drives the arms trade by these countries?

PS do try to keep up.

I think we've put to bed the idea that arms races have anything to do with anything other than basic human nature. Can we please move on?

 

[lightgigantic]

I think we've put to bed the idea that arms races have anything to do with anything other than basic human nature. Can we please move on?

and religion deals specifically with human nature (ie what to do with it) - hence the noted social manifestations in its absence

 

[S.A.M.]

Sorry you feel this way. Please hop into your time machine and go back to the good 'ol days of pre-science and technology.

Enjoy your short, brutish life.

My experience in this forum is that atheists have no imagination.

Hence they jump to conclusions about what people are NOT saying and see judgement where there is none.

All I am saying is that if war and violence is a result of ideas, which has proved more effective, religion or science?

 

[superluminal]

Let me put it another way.

Religion has been around since all known history of humanity.

Are we suffering from a danger of extinction? Have we at any period of ALL that time?

Now look at the technological developments of the last 100 years.

How many people have died as a result of the improvement in technology?

Can we today, make the human race extinct if there is a world war? Why and how?

Oh come on! Please hurry to your time machine! How many people have lived longer and healthier lives due to technology? Who is suffering? Those with no access to the benefits of technology due to religio-political bullshit. That's who.

 

[S.A.M.]

I think we've put to bed the idea that arms races have anything to do with anything other than basic human nature. Can we please move on?

Hey you gotta make allowances for those who can't keep up.

Compassion and caring, etc.

 

[S.A.M.]

and religion deals specifically with human nature (ie what to do with it) - hence the noted social manifestations in its absence

Correct. And science does NOT.

 

[S.A.M.]

Oh come on! Please hurry to your time machine! How many people have lived longer and healthier lives due to technology? Who is suffering? Those with no access to the benefits of technology due to religio-political bullshit. That's who.

And this was always so?

Was this not exacerbated by colonialism and exploitation?

(Not to mention the industrial revolution?)

And is the suffering today real?

Or is it artificially created and maintained by those who stand to profit from it?

 

[superluminal]

My experience in this forum is that theists have no imagination.

Hence they jump to conclusions about what people are NOT saying and see judgement where there is none.

All I am saying is that if war and violence is a result of ideas, which has proved more effective, religion or science?

I agree about the theists not having any imagination.

And religion and science are both methods. One proposes that humans need to follow rules put forth by god(s), and the other is just a way of figuring out stuff.

Please add up for me the total worldwide deaths throughout human history committed in then name of religion and in the name of science. Here, I'll give you the second number: zero. You'll be lucky if the first number is under a billion.

 

[lightgigantic]

Oh come on! Please hurry to your time machine! How many people have lived longer and healthier lives due to technology? Who is suffering? Those with no access to the benefits of technology due to religio-political bullshit. That's who.

Albert Einstein - We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.

 

[S.A.M.]

I agree about the theists not having any imagination.

And religion and science are both methods. One proposes that humans need to follow rules put forth by god(s), and the other is just a way of figuring out stuff.

Please add up for me the total worldwide deaths throughout human history committed in then name of religion and in the name of science. Here, I'll give you the second number: zero. You'll be lucky if the first number is under a billion.

So science is the tool used by atheists to murder theists?

That clarifies it. Its a conspiracy!!!

 

[lightgigantic]

I agree about the theists not having any imagination.

And religion and science are both methods. One proposes that humans need to follow rules put forth by god(s), and the other is just a way of figuring out stuff.

Please add up for me the total worldwide deaths throughout human history committed in then name of religion and in the name of science. Here, I'll give you the second number: zero. You'll be lucky if the first number is under a billion.

the residents of hiroshima may disagree

 

[S.A.M.]

Albert Einstein - We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.

Duh!

 

[superluminal]

Correct. And science does NOT.

How can you be so naieve and yet claim to be following a life in science? Human nature and what to do with it is firmly in the province of science. Scientific ethics and responsible stewardship of the planet are primary concerns of the scientific community.

I think you're confusing scientists with politicians and religious zealots.

 

[S.A.M.]

How can you be so naieve and yet claim to be following a life in science? Human nature and what to do with it is firmly in the province of science. Scientific ethics and responsible stewardship of the planet are primary concerns of the scientific community.

I think you're confusing scientists with politicians and religious zealots.

I'm sorry. I had no idea the politicians and religious zealots were designing and manufacturing the missiles and WMDs.

Ethical scientists would obviously have nothing to do with inventions that they know would maim and murder women and children as indiscriminately as soldiers.

 

[superluminal]

the residents of hiroshima may disagree

Don't be an idiot. Do I really have to explain what "in the name of" means?

 

[superluminal]

I'm sorry. I had no idea the politicians and religious zealots were designing and manufacturing the missiles and WMDs.

And I had no idea that the scientific community was defined by the scientists who work on weapons programs.

It's just like you muslim terrorists and fanatics to go to extremes.

(for the learning disabled, this is a form of ironic reflection on the use of a stereotype).