Poll: OUTLAW IRRATIONAL RELIGION???
Offline Poll: OUTLAW IRRATIONAL RELIGION??? This is a simple poll. The excerpt below is from the Richard Dawkins website by Daniel Dennett: It used to be the case that we tended to excuse drunk drivers when they crashed because they weren't entirely in control of their faculties at the time, but now we have wisely inverted that judgment, holding drunk drivers doubly culpable for putting themselves in that irresponsible position in the first place. It is high time we inverted the public attitude about religion as well, finding all socially destructive acts of religious passion shameful, not honourable, and holding those who abet them - the preachers and other apologists for religious zeal - as culpable as the bartenders and negligent hosts who usher dangerous drivers on to the highways. Our motto should be: Friends don't let friends steer their lives by religion. Based off this article I have would like to conduct a poll. When you cast your vote PLEASE UP DATE THE POLL. Here it is: Should society outlaw the teaching of religious ideas? YES: 0 NO: 1
- Login to post comments
No.
There are 6 billion people on this planet. It is utopian and absurd to suggest such an impractical thing. If any war is to be had it has to be a bloodless one were raising awareness of science and critical thinking skills.
The alpha male days of theocracies and fascism died with the age of enlightenment (at least in the west). We know what it is like for atheists in theistic countries and we know what it is like for minority theists under theocracies. Whatever we do to spread reason we must not become that which we hate.
An argument won is best won through appeal. "Might makes right" is brute force, and humans, for the most part, don't like to be forced to do anything.
I'd rather go down with compassion, than to kill my way to the top. Empathy, doesn't make you weak, it merely means you are human, like everyone else.
"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
Yeah Brian but .... Change the word "Outlaw" to "Heal" and I vote yes.
That is what the likes of the RRS mission is.... and so Fix, heal the world wide media ASAP. EDUCATE. 'Love the enemy', big story book J/B etc said ..... , of course
.... just to add, Sue the pope, the FCC etc .... that would be educational ....
I must find more of this stuff. Pat Condell mentioned a group of lawyers to this cause, but I can't find it. Can ya sell snake oil on the tv ?, holy water for a donation ? etc. Ahh the promise of heaven, or night meres of hell !....... voodoo TV , sue sue sue .....
http://www.ffrf.org/legal/hein_supremecourt07/
Supreme Court Faith-based Case Briefed
Atheism Books.
NO, that is not society's place to say what one can or cannot believe. If you have a religion that believes you should stone people to death for adultery and people are actively stoning people, then you must punish them for the laws that they have broken. Thoughtcrime is never a rational thing. That is what most religions base their justice system on. God will punish you for thoughtcrime. Doing the same to believers of irrational ideas is becoming the thing you disdain.
“Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.” Yoda
If we regulated what people could and couldn't believe we'd be no better than religious dictators.
What they said.
Plus: Religion is really a symptom of the real problem, which is irrationality.
I'm far more inclined to pass laws like: All public schools must have manditory courses in critical thinking appropriate to the intelectual development of the students in all school levels from 1st grade through 12th - with focuses on "advertising techniques", logic, identifying "weasel words", and other subjects adults come into contact with on a daily basis.
After a few generations of good critical thinking classes, religion will start to erode on its own.
Getting "good" classes into public schools is a whole other problem >.>;
"Anyone can repress a woman, but you need 'dictated' scriptures to feel you're really right in repressing her. In the same way, homophobes thrive everywhere. But you must feel you've got scripture on your side to come up with the tedious 'Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve' style arguments instead of just recognising that some people are different." - Douglas Murray
...the current tab, without my vote, is:
Yes:0
No: 6
*With* my vote, it becomes:
Yes:0
No:7
...for reasons which others have already said, and probably better than I would have said it.
Conor
______________________________________________________________________
"Faith does not fear reason."--Pope Pius XII
"But it should!"--Me
Yeah, I think in high school(whatever the equivalent is elsewhere as well) that students should be required to take a critical thinking class one semester and then immediately following that, a world religions class that just lays out the facts...good and bad about that all the major religions, and then test them on it. Daniel Dennett talks about this quite a bit in the last beyond belief conference and I also found a short youtube clip where he solely makes this point, its worth checking out.
“Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.” Yoda
One of the main things I hate about organized religion is how they try and have laws passed to legislate MY behavior based on THEIR moral code. If they want to preach to me, fine. I've been able to survive that quite easily. They must also recognize my right to do the same. But I won't adopt their holier-than-thou attitude. So no laws telling them how to live based on my moral code.
"We are the star things harvesting the star energy"
-Carl Sagan
Believers have a right to their delusions and we have the right to believe in reason. Education and knowledge will eventually win the battle over irrationality.
Poll Tab with my vote
Yes 0
No 9
____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me
"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.
Thanks for those who keep the poll calculated when they respond. So far it stands as follows:
Yes: 0
No: 9
Make that:
Yes:0
No: 10
"Physical reality” isn’t some arbitrary demarcation. It is defined in terms of what we can systematically investigate, directly or not, by means of our senses. It is preposterous to assert that the process of systematic scientific reasoning arbitrarily excludes “non-physical explanations” because the very notion of “non-physical explanation” is contradictory.
-Me
Books about atheism
Ummm, Isn't the word "OUTLAW" , the reason the vote is unanimous ? I basically say yes to the rest of it .... and I AM a drunk, who never drives drunk. To say another way, outlaw criminal destructive activity ? YES , NO ..... ummm, well how about a warning message for the voodoo god peddlers .... "For Entertainment Purposes Only" ?
Yes - No
SUE the existing preachers off my TV ... or give me EQUAL TIME , fuck the FCC
Atheism Books.
And the latest poll count (with my vote):
Yes: 0
No: 11
No one should have the right nor the power to dictate what one can or cannot believe. Furthermore, and as I have stated somewhere else, while I don't support outlawing belief, I wholeheartedly support the exclusion of irrational/dangerous beliefs in decision-making process, to put it simply: no one's opinion should be taken into account at mere face value. If someone's opinion is uninformed and/or unsubstantiated, capricious or downright useless or harmful, people should be able to point this out to the one making such irrational claims, without him/her playing the persecution card or the "don't disrespect my belief" card.
Democracy grants people and equal right to their opinion, but it doesn't grant their opinions an equal value.
Lenore, The Cute Little Dead Girl. Twice as good as Jesus.
Thats it, god damn it , I VOTE YES , outlaw irrational anything.
The bigger question is what's the punishment ? Black and White = Gray. The "middle" , the buddhists remind us.
This kind of voting system is primitive, as is our leader election process ..... Who the fuck needs > A < leader anyway ???????? that is an old stupid KING shit idea .....
Atheism Books.
I'd love for some theists to see this thread. How embarassing for them to have to realise that evil atheists would fight for their right to believe nonsense. They are all convinced if atheists got into power they would all be branded enemies of the state.Yet do you think you would see many theists fighting for atheist's rights, or christians for those of muslims? Perhaps, but I doubt it.
Psalm 14:1 "the fool hath said in his heart there is a God"-From a 1763 misprinted edition of the bible
Argument from Sadism: Theist presents argument in a wall of text with no punctuation and wrong spelling. Atheist cannot read and is forced to concede.
Resounding NO.
You can count this no as a collective no from all the core members of RRS. It's the official position of RRS that forcing political or religious ideology on people is irrational. We don't fight just religion. We fight irrationality, and we would not have one form of irrationality replace another.
For the record, I do favor holding individuals who have used religion in a criminal way legally culpable, but that's significantly different than outlawing religion.
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism
Loc wrote:
I'd love for some theists to see this thread. How embarassing for them to have to realise that evil atheists would fight for their right to believe nonsense.
Loc,
I am a theist and that is why I started this thread. The rhetoric of some of the new athiests seems to indicate preachers who teach irrationality have broken a law like a driver who drives under the influence of a substance (see Dennett's comments on the original post). So, I wanted to see what everyone on here thought. You are right. Most who have voted would not outlaw religion despite their conviction that it is fake and irrational. Here is the count so far:
Yes: 1 (By "I am as good as you" )
No: 12
Cool , I voted twice ! No for language, Yes in principal as when Irrational Behavior negatively effects people. You do get locked up if you are even a danger to yourself .....
Parents allow daughter to starve due to "religious beliefs" ..... prosecute? YES
I move that we re-write the measure .....
Atheism Books.
Actually, it's 15 NOs. I know for a fact that Brian, Kelly and Rook agree with me. They may not have seen this thread, but we've talked about this in detail before.
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism
I didn't know you're a theist.Guess you don't have the badge yet. I'm interested to know, how do the current results compare with your expectations?
Psalm 14:1 "the fool hath said in his heart there is a God"-From a 1763 misprinted edition of the bible
Argument from Sadism: Theist presents argument in a wall of text with no punctuation and wrong spelling. Atheist cannot read and is forced to concede.
In general, I would say no to banning religion.
However, the tax except status for churches and their donors needs to be eliminated. Churches need to be treated and taxed as businesses.
The other problem is religion is used as a cover for other crimes. We see this in the case of the polygamy/child rape cult. But even ordinary religion is using fraud to extract money from people. They make claims about God healing people to attract people to the religion they are committing medical fraud. If a snake oil salesman makes claims about the healing of his product that are false, he is prosecuted. So maybe many of the false claims of religion could be legally banned under consumer fraud statues.
So I am NO*.
Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen
Is the idea that the earth is flat, outlawed? No, but we have an education system for that, as crappy as it (education system) can be. We shouldn't outlaw that, as absurd as it is.
Similarly, we should not outlaw religions, as absurd as they are. Now I've heard that parents should not shove (their) religion down their children's throats and I agree, but I don't know how to tackle that one legally and rationally. But the ideas put forth in books, classes etc... should not be forced away.
What I would like, and this has been espoused on this thread and others already, is proper educational tools in place that would wean religion out of the market place of ideas.
So, my answer is no.
I'd also say no, however, I would get rid of tax exemption for religious institutions, any support of them, any references in government (ie "in god we trust"/"under god"
not allow it as an excuse for otherwise unacceptable behaviors or allow it to be put for as a reason for any sort of legislation.
Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team
EXACTLY!
To the theists reading this, especially Christians. We don't want to kill you. We don't want to oppress you. We simply are challenging you to think outside what you are normally used to.
It is absurd and criminal in western cultures, to stone someone to death because they had "impure thoughts'. It not only absurd, but insane, to allow a child to die, because the parent thinks prayer, and not a doctor, will cure them.
Theism is not threatened today, because skeptics want to harm them, but because theism is simply outdated. The threat is not from the skeptic trying to help them, the threat is a simple fear of the unknown.
"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
No: 14
Yes: 1
The wording of this measure is sloppy.
..... "It is high time we inverted the public attitude about religion as well, finding all socially > destructive ACTS < of religious passion shameful, not honourable, and holding those who abet them" .... [ and commit them with LAWS ] YES, religion is not an excuse for harming people ... as in much of Islam today as was in the Xain , Judaic past etc. New laws are needed ....
....holding "the preachers and other apologists for religious zeal - as culpable as the bartenders and negligent hosts who usher dangerous drivers on to the highways." SOMETIMES, terrorist conspirators etc ??? .....
.....OUTLAW IRRATIONAL RELIGION??? NO , I worship whatever.... the FSM
Here I've voted three times .....
the measure deserves a re-write .....
Atheism Books.