The Religion subforum.

Theoryofrelativity said:
Additionally if you don't like the way the debates go, stop yourself participating, join a forum else where.

Good suggestion.

DO NOT presume to request to close the forum down due to your lack of ability to do either of the above.

I never made that request. You need to take it up with the guy that started this thread, Jaster Mereel, but I do agree with him.
 
Jaster Mereel said:
I propose that the Religion subforum be removed from the message board.

the Religion subforum has been transformed from a center of religious debate, to a battlefield where those who don't believe continually ridicule and lambaste those who do... where the moderators (often times being directly involved as participants, and most often among those performing the ridicule) do nothing to end the conflict.

I resemble that remark.

In my humble defence though, I'd gladly lay off the riducule if the more ardent religious proponents would actually demonstrate their claims from time to time.

And you conveniently left out the fact that those proponents also pour out their derision.

I'm sure this proposal will be met with equal scorn and reprimand by those whom I have cited

Not at all, lest we live in glass houses.
 
Woody,

Science will study anything in order to determine facts. It has no boundaries or limitations.

Science starts with problems and seeks to find solutions.

Religion starts by imagining a solution and then attempts to make everything fit that imaginary solution.
 
(Q) said:
In my humble defence though, I'd gladly lay off the riducule if the more ardent religious proponents would actually demonstrate their claims from time to time.
prove to me that things become alive.
cite any scientific journal, paper or publication.
 
Cris said:
Woody,

Science will study anything in order to determine facts. It has no boundaries or limitations.

Science starts with problems and seeks to find solutions.

Religion starts by imagining a solution and then attempts to make everything fit that imaginary solution.

Like it or not ALL philosophies (including science) begin within the human mind, and understanding comes through reasoning. Religion is also a philosophy. Nobody said you have to agree with all philosophies, but if you ignore the merits of philosophy, then you ignore the foundations of our culture and all other world cultures throughout history.

Philosophy defined from the Wikipedia:

Philosophy is a field of study that includes diverse subfields such as aesthetics, epistemology, ethics, logic, and metaphysics, in which people ask questions such as whether God exists, what is the nature of reality, whether knowledge is possible, and what makes actions right or wrong. The fundamental method of philosophy is the use of reasoning to evaluate arguments concerning these questions. However, the exact scope and methodology of philosophy is not rigid. What counts as philosophy is itself debated, and it varies across philosophical traditions.

There is no mention of science in the definition of philosophy. Hence science is a very limited pedagogy, if not totally inadequate for understanding other philosophies (which include religion). I know you and others want science to be the pedagogy, but I am sorry, it is not, and it never will be.

In my humble opinion, It is illogical to assume science explains all philosophies, and quite absurd. Science is a product of philosophy. Assuming philosophy (the cause of science) is now subordinate to science violates the law of cause and effect -- from a philisophical view.

The argument for the existence of God is a Cosmological argument, not a scientific one. Check out the link, and it will explain further.

Alas, this is only a science forum, and if science is all there is to talk about, why should anyone limit themselves to such a small universe? I really like music and the arts a whole lot better. It feeds my emotional side. Yeah, my science degree feeds my family, but art makes life fun.
 
Last edited:
In my defence, I have never begun a thread talking about religion from a religious context, so I am not proposing this idea because my own feathers have been ruffled as a result of derision on the part of atheists towards any idea that I have propounded.

The truth is, from time to time I enjoy reading a religious individual's perspective on their own religion, and from time to time I want to try and understand their viewpoint on their beliefs. The reason why I proposed removing this subforum was that, often times, threads begun by religious people who want to debate a point of dogma with other religious people in the context of religion is deliberately attacked by those who have no religious leanings. It was this that caused me to start this thread, even though I doubted that the proposal would be seriously considered. I felt it was a debate that needed to be started.
 
The problem is not that there is no science about religion, but that religious folks generally present difficult challenges to scientific discussion.
 
i also vote that the religion sub-forum be scrapped.
it seems to be a popular avenue for religious zealots to enter the forums for the sole purpose of preaching to other members and telling them that they are wrong, evolution is wrong, and they are doomed, unless they follow some absurd beliefs.

also as soon as one religious zealot gives up its not long before another comes along, and many members feel compelled to debate these delusional beliefs and the damage they do to society - causing an endless cycle of arguments about the existence or non-existence of imaginary friends, or about the reality of evolution etc.

i am ashamed to say that i have been drawn into these arguments far too many times.

it is obvious that i feel very threatened by the fact that so many individuals are willing to pervert the world with their fear based delusions - but then again i believe that my feelings are justified, and its not surprising given the state of the world.

i have no problem with many of the world's children believing in santa claus - children don't run the place (although sometimes I wonder), and children don't often kill other children en mass, or force them to submit to their bizarre delusions.

am i insensitive or intolerant? perhaps. intolerant of the fact that even in the 21st century, people are mutilating their children's genitals, engaging in genocide, denying evolution in favour of teaching creationism, etc.

tell me, what is the difference between a lebanese child and an israeli child?
nothing, if you don't count the bullshit fed to them by their parents. the two peoples only consider themselves different primarily because of, you guessed it, religion.

i mean really, call me an negative, pessimistic idealist, but how is the situation on this planet supposed to get any better if we silently allow others to spread such vicious lies? instead of worrying that we might be doomed in the afterlife, shouldn't we focus on WHY things are fucked right here right now?

At the end of the day if ignorant people want to debate imaginary friends, or fight each other to the death, and there's nothing i can do about it, I say let them do it somewhere else.
 
tiassa said:
The problem is not that there is no science about religion, but that religious folks generally present difficult challenges to scientific discussion.

People that speak a foriegn language present a difficult challenge to any type of discussion. Someone must understand the other guy's language before a dialogue can even begin.
 
Huwy said:
also as soon as one religious zealot gives up its not long before another comes along, and many members feel compelled to debate these delusional beliefs and the damage they do to society

There is no intelligent dialogue with someone that feels this way - honestly. You've already prejudged the matter, and this is called "prejudice." It is not wise.

And the beliefs are not delusional. They are derived from the data (Bible, Koran) etc. The beliefs could be wrong, but they are not delusional.

You can reject the data, and that's ok. But the data is here for anyone to evaluate. It's not imaginary.

Alas, this is the mentality of sciforums. Many of greatest minds in science were spiritualists, and yet they are "crazy." I'm sorry, but there really is no venue for an intelligent discussion of religion on sciforums. I don't care what you do with the sub-forum. I'm not going there.

At the end of the day if ignorant people want to debate imaginary friends, or fight each other to the death, and there's nothing i can do about it, I say let them do it somewhere else.

I don't believe anybody wants any of this. Personally, I can think of much more productive things to do with my faith. I wonder why a person of non-faith would even be interested in a religion forum. Do they go to christian forums to debate? no, never. They come here to the religion forum where they can gang up with bullying tactics.
 
Last edited:
i went to a christian chat room and asked if someone could please explain the difference between "god" and "santa claus".

i was banned for life immediately.
 
leopold99 said:
prove to me that things become alive.
cite any scientific journal, paper or publication.

Is that your claim or mine?
 
Oh, come on.
How could anyone even think of deleting the religion forum?

For one thing, most of the religious posters stay down in religion. They have little to no interest in the rest of the forums. So, if you don't want to get into religious debate, then you can simply steer away from the afflicted subforums.
Simple, yes?

For two, a large segment of our scientific brethren pretty much devote their entire existence to talking religion. I don't really understand why. But they seem to get some kind of kick out of kicking theists around. So, let them have their jollies since talking about science just doesn't do it for them.
Know what I mean?

If the theists don't like being kicked around? Then they can go to some other board. Obviously, the religious posters who remain here after realizing what sort of treatment they get on this board like being kicked around. It's really not such an amazing concept, you know. Religion thrives in persecution. People like Q and Skinwalker will probably cause religion to persist for years beyond its natural lifespan.

I can't really say much though, because there was a time that I used to like kicking around theists too. In forum and offline. I got bored with it though. Didn't seem to be much point really. But, to each their own.

The religion subforum (or the holy melee) stays. And we should crucify any who state otherwise. Including Porfiry if he should sound off on that side of the issue... then he could rise from the grave and start a cult of his own....

Heh.
Reminds me of how I used to get rid of those religious guys that come around knocking on doors.
"No thanks. I'm already in a cult."
 
invert_nexus said:
Obviously, the religious posters who remain here after realizing what sort of treatment they get on this board like being kicked around. It's really not such an amazing concept, you know. Religion thrives in persecution. People like Q and Skinwalker will probably cause religion to persist for years beyond its natural lifespan.

LOL
 
Huwy said:
i went to a christian chat room and asked if someone could please explain the difference between "god" and "santa claus".

i was banned for life immediately.

You've already stated your position with such an analogy. There really is no common ground for a discussion.

What forum was that? Not that I don't believe you. How could anyone take you seriously with an introduction like that? Why don't you just state your position like this: you don't believe God exists period, and leave out the childish overtones associated with santa claus?
 
Back
Top