The problem of Religion.

Lord Insane said:
Evolution gave us brain and intelligence and even moral , so let us use it ...

The solution to the problem of delusional religion is to inform people about its
problems, and then let them decide themselves, if they want to be delusional or to become free from the inhibitions of religion ....

There will allways be delusional people in the world, but as long as they are not allowed to impose their inhibitions of religion un the rest of us ..... then it is OK - after all religion can be entertaining and some people also need delusion to escape the reality of a hard life, or perhaps they just have the godgene .....

Sam - I found it !!!
Let us inform religious people about the problems of religion - AND THEN LET THEM DECIDE THEMSELVES .....

I do not want to make " spiritual abuse " of religious people - as one of the other threads mentioned ....

As long as religious people do not want to impose obsolete and delusional
inhibitions on the rest of us - then let religious people decide for themselves , what they want to do ..... perhaps they have a godgene or need a delusion
to escape your hard everyday reality ....... NO PROBLEM...

Secularism = freedom !!!!!!!!!

:p
 
Spidergoat:

By your definition, wouldn't secularism be anti-life?

It would promote assimilation of genetic traits and decrease diversity, making all humans equally susceptible to environmental pressures.

Aren't the racists and xenophobes more supportive of evolution?
By insisting on preserving their genetic uniqueness, do they not favor survival?

(loveaduck! what a contradiction!!)

edit: Lord Insane, what do you think of this post? ;)
 
Sarkus said:
Not sure how this relates to what I said, though. :confused:

If a speciation event occurs between parent and child then the child is NO LONGER OF THE SAME SPECIES AS THEIR PARENT - BY DEFINITION - and can not sexually reproduce with the same species of the parent - BY DEFINITION.

If only one person has speciated away from humanity then they can no longer breed with humans - or else they would NOT be considered a different species and no speciation event would have occurred.

Evolution sometimes goes slow Sarkus !!
A donkey and a horse can make a mule !!!!!!

I havent tried - and it is unethical - but I think I might consider betting half a months pay on , that it is actually possible to make an offspring of a Bonobo monkey and a human beeing .......

Almost 99 % identical DNA - with a little help that might just be possibel ...
Planet of the apes - HELLO !!!!!!!!!

;)
 
Lord Insane said:
Evolution sometimes goes slow Sarkus !!
A donkey and a horse can make a mule !!!!!!

I havent tried - and it is probably unethical - but I think I might consider betting half a months pay on , that it is actually possible to make an offspring of a Bonobo monkey and a human beeing .......

Almost 99 % identical DNA - with a little help that might just be possibel ...
Planet of the apes - HELLO !!!!!!!!!

;)

Are these offspring fertile?

I was under the impression that mules are sterile?

http://www.kyhorsepark.com/imh/bw/mule.html
Mule: The hybrid animal produced when a male ass (Jack) is crossed with a female horse. The mule is a sterile hybrid, meaning it cannot reproduce.
 
samcdkey said:
Spidergoat:

By your definition, wouldn't secularism be anti-life?

It would promote assimilation of genetic traits and decrease diversity, making all humans equally susceptible to environmental pressures.

Aren't the racists and xenophobes more supportive of evolution?
By insisting on preserving their genetic uniqueness, do they not favor survival?

(loveaduck! what a contradiction!!)

edit: Lord Insane, what do you think of this post? ;)

I have to make some food and eat - see you later - it is 7.08 PM here in Denmark .... :)
 
Last edited:
samcdkey said:
Spidergoat:

By your definition, wouldn't secularism be anti-life?

It would promote assimilation of genetic traits and decrease diversity, making all humans equally susceptible to environmental pressures.
I don't see how.

Interbreeding creates more diversity, not less.
 
spidergoat said:
I don't see how.

Interbreeding creates more diversity, not less.

So separation by continents actually made humans less diverse in genetic traits?
 
samcdkey said:
So separation by continents actually made humans less diverse in genetic traits?
Periods of separation can promote distinctive traits that can add to the diversity of other human groups later on.

Within the gene pool, diversity is a strength, even in a hypothetical situation where all races merge and look alike.
 
spidergoat said:
Periods of separation can promote distinctive traits that can add to the diversity of other human groups later on.

Within the gene pool, diversity is a strength, even in a hypothetical situation where all races merge and look alike.

So if periods of separation promote distinctive traits, do they increase the probability of favoring adaptation in one group over another?

And if diversity is a strength what happens after a long period of gene mixing in the whole pool?
 
This is interesting, but I'm not sure what it has to do with religion. I'm talking about diversity of ideas, and how religion or culture inhibits this.
 
spidergoat said:
Religion itself is an aspect of evolution, it confers certain survival benefits

Sorry Spidergoat , you got it a little bit wrong .............

Evolution = changing of genes - forget the rest !!!

;)
 
The divide between atheists and believers is spiritual. Christians are spititual - atheists aren't. Any atheist who says they otherwise are admitting to God, since God is in the spiritual realm.

Atheists will never be convinced until they can get past that hurdle.
 
Nonsense, ggazoo. Buddhists are atheists. I'm interested in the spiritual, as well. Theists don't have a monopoly on spirituality.

Lord Insane,
Strictly not, you are right. I was referring to the ability of humans to create culture, which evolved along with other traits, and also to the meme theory, which describes the evolution of things other than genes.
 
samcdkey said:
Are these offspring fertile?

I was under the impression that mules are sterile?

http://www.kyhorsepark.com/imh/bw/mule.html

Yep ,they are sterile :

Horse 64 chromosomes + donkey 62 chromosomes = mule 63 chromosomes
horse 64 chromosomes + zebra 44 chromosomes = zorse unknown number of chromosomes , but it does exist !!!!!!!!!!!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1408717.stm

Human 46+XY chromosomes + bonobo 48 chromosomes = BUMAN ??????

Luckily , we know about the evolution of homo sapiens , so we know that evolution of the species we came from , was slow , but still we managed to evolve into new species untill our present homo sapiens !!!

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/species.html
 
samcdkey said:
By your definition, wouldn't secularism be anti-life?

It would promote assimilation of genetic traits and decrease diversity, making all humans equally susceptible to environmental pressures.

Aren't the racists and xenophobes more supportive of evolution?
By insisting on preserving their genetic uniqueness, do they not favor survival?
I like secular government, because within it, we have the freedom to believe what we wish, that includes racism and xenophobia.
 
spidergoat said:
I like secular government, because within it, we have the freedom to believe what we wish, that includes racism and xenophobia.

I like secular government too.

We have it in India even though atheism is less than 1%.

We have some racism and xenophobia as well, but mostly we're pretty tolerant with ideas.

Probably because there is no central organisation of any one religion.
 
samcdkey said:
I like secular government too.

We have it in India even though atheism is less than 1%.

We have some racism and xenophobia as well, but mostly we're pretty tolerant with ideas.

Probably because there is no central organisation of any one religion.
Would you have preferred to live in religious pakistan?
 
Vega said:
Would you have preferred to live in religious pakistan?

I have cousins there.

And its not religious, its despotic.

I'm religious.
 
samcdkey said:
I have cousins there.

And its not religious, its despotic.

I'm religious.
ok, so back to the question!
would you prefer to live in pakistan rather than india?
 
Back
Top