What else is new?

Since the beginning of time, religion has been an evil force in the world. I am a spiritual person and I believe there is a higher force.  Life is great and mysterious and we will never understand it.

But evil people have always manipulated religion to satisfy greed and power lust. The warning is a little late. I agree with you but how do we change the world? History teaches us that all forms of religion existed long before our tiime and still nothing changes. My religion can lick your religion. Religion is supposed to make our lives better, to make us better. It aint working!

Sooooo, what do we do? Anybody have any ideas?

by Caronome (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 238 comments) on Sunday, February 3, 2008 at 9:53:16 AM
 

Here's one, and it's a great idea

This message suggests exactly how we can significantly change and improve our world, and it explains why we must.

And the best thing about it is that the messenger does not seek personal power from behind a podium or pulpit.

He understands why Lao Tsu wrote in The Book of Tao (Dao): "When the best leader's work is accomplished, the people say, 'We did it ourselves!'"

That's because the ideal is to provide the people with an innovative way to unite, determine their own collective destiny, collaborate, and cooperatively accomplish common goals using the common wealth for the common good.

That same idea was expressed in the Judaic "Old Testament" scriptures in the Bible, which advise us to: "Be wise and consider the ways of the ants, which having no guide, overseer or ruler, provide food in the summer and gather in the harvest."

Similarly, the Old Testament also says, "If you want a king, you reject God," for "God is not a man nor a son of man," and "besides God there is no Savior." It's true -- absolutely, positively true, as you will see.

http://reformationcomingsoon.bravehost.com

 

by Sarah Morgan (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 176 comments) on Sunday, February 3, 2008 at 2:00:59 PM
 

Its a small idea only but

most of the harm that religions do seems to arise out of the power that followers give over to others when they have faith. That is when they stop thinking for themselves.

Emphasize and encourage the religious people in your world to be people of conscience rather than people of faith.  People of conscience question and take responsibility and engage with the issues. People of conscience can and do change their views when they take on new evidence because they are willing to look at it and challenge their "faith". 

I don't like religion but taken one at a time people who are religious aren't very different to people who are not.  

by Brett Paatsch (0 articles, 2 quicklinks, 22 diaries, 1041 comments) on Sunday, February 3, 2008 at 5:31:43 PM
 

Not true.

I don't like religion but taken one at a time people who are religious aren't very different to people who are not. 

 Not true. They are vastly different. I would be happy to have that debate. For starters, people who eschew religion are infinitely more in touch with reality than those who blindly believe in pious dogma and pray to imaginary, man-made mythological beings who spuriously reside in the ether above.

It is not a matter of liking or disliking religion; it is a matter of whether religion is rational or irrational. Simply ask yourself, “Would it be logical to pray to Thor or Poseidon or to deny your child medical care in the name of Ra the Sun god?”

by Frank J. Ranelli (66 articles, 143 quicklinks, 29 diaries, 383 comments) on Sunday, February 3, 2008 at 7:17:03 PM
 

What to do...

Sooooo, what do we do? Anybody have any ideas?

Exactly what Kelly and the Rational Response Squad are doing, shedding light on the atrocities committed in the name of superstition and ancient folklore.

Sunlight is always the best sanitizer.

-Frank J. Ranelli, Senior Editor

by Frank J. Ranelli (66 articles, 143 quicklinks, 29 diaries, 383 comments) on Sunday, February 3, 2008 at 7:05:47 PM
 

Religion may cause......

Thank you for reporting on child abuse.  I prefer to call it child cruelty -.  When you consider how much support the public contributes to animal cruelty, it is possible that we have overused the term child abuse and the public has become settled in a comfort zone and is somewhat desensitized when it comes to our children.     You are the voice for these small children.  Please continue to write about this epidemic.

I am a retired crime analyst with over 20 years in law enforcement.  I have documented hundreds of cases of child abuse where children have been injured and often killed.  Considering the statistics, not much has changed over the years and if more people knew what really happened to abused children they would quit making excuses for people who hurt or kill children.   All these helpless children can do is lie there and take it – think about that folks.  Child abuse is a crime and should be treated as the horrific crime it really is.  

 Awareness is not enough anymore. Three million abused children each year constitutes an epidemic in my book. It is time to address the issue in cold hard facts. Punishing the abuser should be our number one focus. It is naïve to believe that all abusers will change after a few sessions of counseling and anger management. Our society is paying dearly. Our children are paying dearly as well. We can no longer afford to tolerate child cruelty. We will pay one way or another. Just look at the facts:

 

According to the U.S. National Statistics:

 

DIRECT COSTS OF CHILD ABUSE:

 

Hospitalization $6,205,395,000

Chronic Health Problems $2,987,957,400

Mental Health Care System $ 425,110,400

Child Welfare System $14,400,000,000

Law Enforcement $ 24,709,000

Judicial System $ 341,174,702

Total Direct Costs $24,384,347,302

 

INDIRECT COSTS OF CHILD ABUSE:

 

Special Education $ 223,607,830

Mental Health & Health Care $4,627,636,025

Juvenile Delinquency $8,805,291,372

Lost Productivity to Society $ 656,000,000

Adult Criminality $55,380,000,000

Total Indirect Costs $69,692,535,227

 

TOTAL: $94,076,882,529

When you become aware of child cruelty, whether it be from reading about it in a newspaper or personally involved, it then becomes your responsibility and obligation to get involved to ensure that the child does not fall through the cracks. You can and should become part of the movement to stop child cruelty and protect our most vulnerable citizens. Those who abuse children must be held accountable and responsible for their actions. Justice must be served.

If children could vote, politicians would listen. Please be the voice for our children. by contacting your local child abuse organization in your area. Ask them how you can help. They will be glad you did. Contact your local and state representatives and demand protection for our children. Your vote is very important to your legislators.

Thank you. 

 
Jane LeMond-Alvarez

www.janealvarez.com

www.walloftears.org

 

by Jane LeMond-Alvarez (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 8 comments) on Sunday, February 3, 2008 at 5:16:11 PM
 

Nothing but irrational polemics on either side.

More pseudo-rational bunk from the anti-religious crowd on the far left, to match the anti-rational bunk from the pseudo-religious crowd on the far right.  Let's just focus on one of the many errors:

"A study done by the Barna Group, a christian research firm, showed that many young Americans see christians as hypocritical, and that they really are hypocrites."

The problem with this is that the definition of the word "hypocrite" is someone who pretends to be something.  It is, in fact, derived the Greek word for "actor."  You can't hold members of a group responsible for the behavior of people who are only pretending to be members.  (Unless you are more interested in factional bigotry than logic and honesty.)

It's bad enough when polemicists use the illogical (or, perhaps, simply dishonest) tactic of generalizing the behavior of a subset to condemn the entire set, but to claim A is bad because B does bad things while pretending to be A?  That's beyond irrational and well off into the Twilight Zone of counterfactual spin.  Why don't we just blame Native Americans for the Boston Tea Party, or indict movie stars for the crimes of their on-screen characters, or hold people responsible for debts incurred by identity thieves?

Sure, there's a significant amount of nominal religion that's insincere (I would contend the vast majority of it) and religion is one of the most convenient excuses for cruel or just plain crazy behavior, simply because it consists of commonly-held notions.  Freedom and democracy are also commonly-held notions, yet when Neoconservatives excuse their insane behavior by citing freedom and democracy, rational people do not therefore conclude that freedom and democracy make people do insane things.  Likewise, rational people do not condemn religion for the crimes of those who are merely exploiting religion to justify their idiocy and bigotry.

It is perfectly natural that both the anti-religious and the fundamentalist love to assert the same lie: that fundamentalist lunacy is "real religion" while the religion of sensible, progressive people is conveniently edited out of the picture or dismissed as anomalous.  The reason they share this conceit is that both of these extremes are mere political postures based more on cultural loyalties and sentiment than evidence and reason.

by John Leith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 6 comments) on Sunday, February 3, 2008 at 6:34:00 PM
 

I beg to differ.

In your supposed first "error", you are making the etymological fallacy, which is loosely defined as assuming that the definition of the root is the same as the definition is today. True, there is generally a very high correlation, but that doesn't take into consideration connotations and other linguistic changes. A hypocrite, as defined today, is somebody who pretends to believe/be one thing, but then acts contrary to that. That definition fits the majority of christians perfectly (Ted Haggard, anybody?).

Also, you may have missed (I could imply here that you yourself are being dishonest, but I won't) the points where I clearly state that not all religious people have these kinds of issues, that there are varying degrees of religiosity and dogmatism, etc. I am not condemning the "entire set" of people--rather, I am condemning the belief system which continues to cause harm to many people aruond the world.

A prescription drug doesn't have to kill every person who takes it for it to be pulled from the shelves. It may actually have a very slight risk of serious side effects and still be recalled. It is past time to recall religion.

by Kelly O'Connor (9 articles, 1 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 18 comments) on Sunday, February 3, 2008 at 8:40:48 PM
 

An uncomfortable notion

Kelly, 

I would add that it is a matter of reason and rationale for agnostics and atheists to challenge and confront 'moderates of faith' with the uncomfortable notion (for some) that God may indeed not exist and 'ostensible moderation' may be the bedrock from which religious extremism is forged. 

Also, quite often religion and people who are adamant in the inerrancy of their religion are foolishly intractable for they typically refuse to accept empirical facts that stand in the way of their inconsistent and unsustainable beliefs.

Ergo, a child that is denied proven, scientific medical care – because of a parent's fanatical belief – may needlessly suffer or even die. However, not because of the final dogmatic extremism that is now rooted in the parent’s paradigm, but likely due to at some point in the parent’s life that the embryonic seeds of religious fervor and fallacy were planted and fostered through unwarranted and inculcated proselytization. 

Finally, there is nothing “polemic” about challenging the notion of fantasy and folklore as an acceptable form of contemporary reality.

Frank J. Ranelli, Senior Editor

by Frank J. Ranelli (66 articles, 143 quicklinks, 29 diaries, 383 comments) on Sunday, February 3, 2008 at 11:31:42 PM
 

I totally agree

It is the moderates who provide the "cover", so to speak, for the extremists. The whole "they're not all like that" excuse is what gets religion off the hook and keeps it taboo to criticize it. That's why people like Sam Harris, Dawkins, Hitchens, (me?) are so important and why it is necessary to speak out about these issues. Even if people don't want to hear it. I love this quote from Dr. Albert Ellis - "By not caring too much about what people think, I'm able to think for myself and propagate ideas which are very often unpopular. "

by Kelly O'Connor (9 articles, 1 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 18 comments) on Monday, February 4, 2008 at 12:30:47 AM
 

Movement Realism

Yes Kelly, you are in my view to be included among those that wish to dispel the myths, lies, and duplicity of religion. The Four Horsemen, Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens are certainly the vanguards of ‘movement realism’, but a bonafided subset of critical and independent-minded people – such as yourself – have emerged to confront once-sacred canon as dubious and not beyond reproach.

 

Religion is, in all its forms, intellectual slavery. When one frees their mind of baseless guilt, gullibility and gods, they – as did I five years ago – find a renewed vigor and clarity that unshackles the psyche to pursue truth over piety.

 

Theocracy is, after all, the ultimate methodology by which to rule a nation. Rationality and intellectualism are always persecuted while faith and ignorance meld into blind nationalism. This produces a mass delusion of fallaciously grand arrogance that erroneously justifies insidious acts of human brutality and conquest.

 

I have been working on an essay, perhaps a thesis, entitled, “The Misguided Principles of Faith” that argues faith ‘does requires proof in order for it to achieve validity and legitimacy.’

 

It would be an honor to have you as a contributor or a co-author.

 

- Frank J. Ranelli, Senior Editor

 

by Frank J. Ranelli (66 articles, 143 quicklinks, 29 diaries, 383 comments) on Monday, February 4, 2008 at 1:04:23 AM
 

Everybody thinks they are right

The truth, however, is that only one person can show the way out of the mess, and put an end to the conflict and division.

Unfortunately, so far he has been rejected by his generation. But the time will come when his message will be recognized for what it is, and it will change the world.

http://reformationcomingsoon.bravehost.com

 

by Sarah Morgan (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 176 comments) on Tuesday, February 5, 2008 at 1:05:34 PM
 

Huh?

I sincerely hope that the "one person" that you're talking about isn't Jesus. If so, please try to make comments that contain substance instead of pure prosetylization. 

After reading a bit on your site, I must say that this is intellectually devoid and factually meaningless nonsense.

by Kelly O'Connor (9 articles, 1 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 18 comments) on Tuesday, February 5, 2008 at 4:40:21 PM
 

Re: Huh?

He's not Jesus, but he does serve the Spirit of truth that Jesus and many other prophets said would come.

As for your dismissal of his work as "intellectually void," I wouldn't be so quick to judge if I were you. If you really read all of it, you would not and could not say that. In fact, you would probably be very glad you read it.

Most people really don't read it. They peruse it until they find something they don't like or disagree with, and they dismiss it. Like you.

 

by Sarah Morgan (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 176 comments) on Wednesday, February 6, 2008 at 1:26:25 PM
 

But you're right. Religion does cause ...

bigotry, hypocrisy, pride, militancy, violence, death and destruction. At least organized religion as we now know it does, in certain cases.

Right now, true religion is not noticed, because its practioners are humble, peaceful, faithful, and "meek," if you will.

That's what the author of this web site is trying to promote, while at the same time exposing and rebuking religious bigots and hypocrites.

THAT's why I'm trying to spread the word.

http://reformationcomingsoon.bravehost.com

 

by Sarah Morgan (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 176 comments) on Wednesday, February 6, 2008 at 5:40:22 PM
 

In fact, the title of his first book is

Real Prophecy Unveiled: Why the Christ Will Not Come Again, and Why the Religious Right Is Wrong, published in 2002.

by Sarah Morgan (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 176 comments) on Wednesday, February 6, 2008 at 5:44:07 PM