Liquidrage

It is sad that allmost all religions claim to have ansers when in fact all they do is claim someone else has the answers and you cannot get them until after you die.

There are big questions out there. Where did the universe come from? Why is there something and not nothing?
But of course little is being done to research this because for most people religion already has the answers.

Humanity clearly has nearly unlimited potential.
But the sad fact is that humanity never becomes omnipotent and benevolent. We can deduce this because evil (lets consider this violation of the Golden rule if nothing else) still exists and true omnipotence would transcend time.

GW Bush, the Pope and the lady next door to me that spends all her time at church are hurting humanity by pretending they have answers that they don't.

What would the world be like if all the money dumped into religion was instead dumped into scientific research?

I consider theism to be harmfull.

[ July 22, 2002: Message edited by: Liquidrage ]</p>

wildernesse

GW Bush, the Pope and the lady next door to me that spends all her time at church are hurting humanity by pretending they have answers that they don't.

How? Because they are not concerned with how the universe began? I’m not deeply concerned with it either—but that’s because I’m more interested in what it is today. Does my interest in politics and conservation mean that I’m hurting humanity?

What would the world be like if all the money dumped into religion was instead dumped into scientific research?

Well, we’d probably have more research done about everything which could lead to quicker answers. But what does that money go towards now? The money in our offering goes towards feeding the hungry, helping our congregation with specific emergency needs, paying the church’s light bill, paying our pastor, etc. A lot of religion’s money goes toward helping the needy, education at affiliated universities and schools, etc. Would we miss those things that religion is now paying for? Some of those things would need to be made up somehow. And how do you suggest the freely given money get into the scientific realm? Higher taxes?

I consider theism to be harmfull.

I disagree, but that is your opinion—and you’re welcome to it. I don’t mean to change your opinions—just ask questions about the reasons you base your opinions on. Thank you for not writing in an inflammatory tone.

--tiba

KnightWhoSaysNi

Tiba,
I'd have to disagree as well. Though I'm a non-theist, I've come to see more and more that dogmatism and fanaticism are the problem, not a particular metaphysical worldview. There many, many Christians and other religious people I've encountered who are quite rational and tolerant. There will always be a Joseph Stalin or an Osama bin Laden for every belief system. And you'll find a Mahatma Gandhi or a Carl Sagan from most belief systems as well.

For me, I don't really care what a person's worldview is when I get to know them (as long as it's not extreme or intolerant). I'm more concerned with the kind of human being they are.

[ July 22, 2002: Message edited by: Nightshade ]</p>

JerryM

Religion persists because it fills a psychological need. For many people, life is full of fear--fear of death, fear of the future, fear of the unknown. They prefer definite and concrete answers to life's questions, even if those answers are erroneous, or based mostly on legend and superstition. It's an interesting debate about whether religion on the whole has done more harm than good. I haven't studied the issue in depth, but on blalance, I think it's about a toss-up. Martin Marty, the distinguished religion professor at Univ. of Chicago addresses this in his book, "Education, Religion, and the Common Good." I believe he concludes that religion's overall influence has been a small amount positive.