What people see in religion

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2002-07-20 03:50pm

This is how an Inquisition normally proceeded.

We find a Jew.

We bring him to a room.

We show him the instruments of torture that we'll use on him if he doesn't convert. Most people converted after seeing them.

If they don't convert, we bring in a goat or dog and put it in the torture devices and show the nonbeliever what we're going to do to him. 90% of people converted by this stage.

If they don't convert, torture the shit out of them until they die or convert.

That's what I remember from high school at any rate, and that's the kind of process they used on people like Galileo.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2002-07-20 03:58pm

Martin Blank wrote:Though the atrocities mentioned certainly cannot be forgotten, let us also not forget that various people and agencies, working with religious guidelines, have also done much good in the world. The late Mother Teresa and her Missionaries of Charity are among the best-known,

Mother Theresa appropriated money donated for the purpose of helping the sick, and used it for her recruiting campaigns. She fought against contraception and family planning, she fought against sex education, and she declared that AIDS was God's just punishment for "sexual immorality". That is not "much good".

The difference between Christian charities and secular charities such as the United Way is that Christian charities tend to use a large portion of their income for recruiting purposes rather than direct aid to the intended recipients. This is not something to be proud of.

but many other organizations do a great deal of good around the world and are less well-known. A Christian group in the Sudan purchases the contracts of slaves (Christian and not) in order to repatriate them with their families, and the Salvation Army works worldwide to help the needy and is not particularly forceful about its beliefs.

Yes, there are some good works by Christians. But Mother Theresa is not a good example of such works. However, the question is whether the Christian faith is helping or hurting. There are vast problems in the developing world which are causing untold suffering (eg- AIDS, overpopulation), and the church is doing everything in its power to exacerbate these problems. Window-dressing does not make up for this massive problem.

The past actions of many religions should be viewed against what those religions have become today. Yes, many of them are still divisive, intolerant, and non-inclusive, but these are generally the exception and not the norm. Admitting the past is one way to aid in healing the present and future, and while some groups still have long distances to go, the fact that even the Catholic Church is opening up and nearing (sometimes even giving) apologies for past crimes is an enormous step in the right direction.

But they still think their beliefs are more important than human life, as we have seen most critically in the example of AIDS education in Africa. Given a choice between fighting AIDS and fighting sexual promiscuity, they choose the latter, knowing full well that they are exacerbating a pandemic which has already infected some 17 million people.

The standard right-wing intolerant moron says things like "if you don't want to get AIDS, don't have sex", while fighting sex education. This is like saying "if you don't want to be killed in a car crash, be a good driver", and refusing to teach anyone about seatbelts.

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2002-07-20 04:18pm

But saddly in five to twenty years it will not be such a great problem
Why?
By then the currant group of Aids Sufferers will be dead, Not just diying but very dead
This will devstate some countrys unless they act fast, Tailand is a good exaple, a recent study by WHO (World Heath Org, I think thats the name) that HIV-Postive cases has crept above 26% of that Countrys popluation
36% of new recruit into the Army are HIV postive

And its happening in some Afrian countrys to, We are seeing it rise above 10% of the COUNTRYS population
It IS a serious problem but sometimes I think people fail to grasp exactly how bad of a problem it will be

By the time 2030 Roles around we will have had over 100 million people die to this if the predictions are anywhere accurate

And thats as they say
Is a Statistic

Stravo · Post by **Stravo** » 2002-07-20 05:02pm

Something else that is just awful about the AIDS epidemic, is that one of the main ways to fight its spread is simple birth control method - other words protected sex. What is one of the beliefs that the Catholic church staunchly defends - NO brith control. One of the reasons that the church gives concerning opposing contraception is that it goes against a natural process....as one of my Jesuit teachers pointed out "When I have a headache and take an aspirin, I'm going against a natural process too, is anyone going to seriously argue that I shouldn't take an aspirin." I loved that guy he had an ascerbic wit about everything and kind of went against the stereotype of most priests that people have.

The church, and most other releigions have these dogmas that can interefere with the way the modern world is unfurling. Birth Control is turning into an absolute neccessity now that the world popoulation is exploding, and coupled with the AIDS epidemic, it goes against common sense to continue to uphold a philosohy and policy that now HURTS humanity and not helps. Does the all loving God REALLY want you and I not to slap on a rubber but instead get sick from a debilitating sickness and have our families watch us slowly waste away OR have the world drown in unwanted children??? There needs to be some sort of reform in the church concerning some antiquated notions. Some Catholics point to Vatican II as if that was the be all and end all. Vatican II was JUST THE BEGINNING in my view. It only shed some light on problems, but we're looking at a radical shift in the way the world works. The Middle Ages values and way of doing things was alright for the church because the world simply did not change that radically for centuries...thats not the case now.

I don't know why I write so much when I post on this topic....

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2002-07-20 05:33pm

Its somthing that hits close to home Stravo so you want to use it to vent a little bit along with making your point

Besides thats not a long post,
Its a accurat one

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2002-07-20 07:53pm

Darth Wong wrote:Mother Theresa appropriated money donated for the purpose of helping the sick, and used it for her recruiting campaigns.

...

The difference between Christian charities and secular charities such as the United Way is that Christian charities tend to use a large portion of their income for recruiting purposes rather than direct aid to the intended recipients. This is not something to be proud of.

That's what charities do, Mike. Even the best charities never use more than 50 cents on the dollar for direct aid. With some of the best-known charities (including, I dare say, a couple of particularly prominent secular ones), the ratio of collections to aid distributed is downright appalling.

According to my dad, who is the CFO of a major insurance corporation's marketing subsidiary, the accountants working under him performed a cost:benefit analysis of several major national charities before his company decided which ones to contribute money to and which ones not to. United Way came in near the bottom of the list (less than four cents for every dollar donated).

Please note: I'm not mentioning my dad's position for an appeal to authority, but to point out where he got his information from and to get across the fact that this isn't just somebody spouting off his ignorant opinion, but rather a major study done by a corporation to decide the eventual destinations of hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2002-07-20 08:53pm

Stravo: I agree that Vatican II was an important first step - and ONLY a first step - in defining what it means to be Catholic in the third millennium. I suspect that we'll be due for a Vatican III sometime in the next 50 years or so, and probably in the next 20.

Wicked Pilot · Post by **Wicked Pilot** » 2002-07-20 09:23pm

Iceberg wrote:According to my dad, who is the CFO of a major insurance corporation's marketing subsidiary, the accountants working under him performed a cost:benefit analysis of several major national charities before his company decided which ones to contribute money to and which ones not to. United Way came in near the bottom of the list (less than four cents for every dollar donated).

According to the Better Business Bureau, (http://www.bbbonline.org) The United Way spend 91% of their 41 million annual budget on programs. Fund raising expenses were less than one percent.

As a comparison, Christian's Childrens Fund only spent 80% of their 123 million on programs. But they did spent 13% on fund raising.

The only Catholic institution I found listed on the site is the Catholic Foreign Mission Society of America. They have an annual budget of 71 million and spend 90% of it on programs. 5% goes to fund raising.

As an aside, the origional question and purpose of this board retaining to "what people see in religion" is far from what is being discussed here. I'm thinking it's about time to close this thread before the topic jumps once more.

David · Post by **David** » 2002-07-20 10:42pm

::uses dark sith powers to close thread::

::nothing happens::

Drat, foiled again.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2002-07-20 11:37pm

Stravo: I agree that Vatican II was an important first step - and ONLY a first step - in defining what it means to be Catholic in the third millennium. I suspect that we'll be due for a Vatican III sometime in the next 50 years or so, and probably in the next 20.

Doubtful. The Pope has already lined up his successors. Papal politics' wheels are turning to ensure that the next Pope is arch-conservative, like John Paul II. The only thing I can see a Vatican III conference doing would be to restore some older practices and reversing some of what was set in by Vatican II.

There's even some speculation running around that the Cardinals had John Paul I killed because he was going to liberalize the Church and make birth control OK.

Post by **Steve** » 2002-07-20 11:52pm

Durandal wrote: There's even some speculation running around that the Cardinals had John Paul I killed because he was going to liberalize the Church and make birth control OK.

.......LOL!

Can you give specifics?

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2002-07-21 12:08am

USAFA: Programs meaning what now? The effectiveness of programs depends on a number of factors - it's quite possible that the BBB figures are correct but misleading, depending on how they were reported to the BBB. I distinctly remember my dad telling me that the cost:benefit ratio of donating to United Way was absurdly low and that's why his company didn't do UW.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2002-07-21 12:41am

Iceberg wrote:USAFA: Programs meaning what now? The effectiveness of programs depends on a number of factors - it's quite possible that the BBB figures are correct but misleading, depending on how they were reported to the BBB.

Go to Give.org if you want to know more about the BBB's methods. Frankly, I feel that the BBB is a better reference than "my Dad".

Moreover, anyone who witnesses church charities in practice knows that these figures are a red herring to the original point, which was that Christian charities use aid as an excuse to proselytize (ie- recruit), while secular charities don't (hell, they can't, because they have no religion to peddle). Some Christian charities are better than others, but the money spent by a Christian charity on programs always goes partially towards proselytizing, so the amount of money spent on programs has nothing to do with the issue I brought up.

I distinctly remember my dad telling me that the cost:benefit ratio of donating to United Way was absurdly low and that's why his company didn't do UW.

Again, I'm afraid you'll have to do better than a vague reference to something your Dad said. BTW, the Salvation Army spends only 74% of its income on charitable programs. 18% goes to administration, and 6% goes to fattening up its asset sheet. But as I said before, the point was that Christian charities proselytize, while secular charities don't.

Mother Theresa's charities were a good example; they were virtually devoid of modern medical equipment, but they were full of nuns trying to convert people on their deathbeds (and Mother Theresa herself received top-notch top-dollar medical treatment, while the people she "cared for" died slowly in unhygienic conditions). If we use your logic, they were excellent charities because most of the money went to African programs. The problem was what those programs were doing.

Mr. B · Post by **Mr. B** » 2002-07-21 03:04am

And what about Prez Bush's idea to give tax payer money to faith based charities.

These charities will only use the money to expand their conversion programs and to fatten their pockets.

What if a poor athiest showed up and wanted some soup but had to listen to hours of bible reading and attempts to convert him. Would his stomach or his conscience prevail?

Ladysekhmet · Post by **Ladysekhmet** » 2002-07-21 05:56am

I think the problem with a lot of religious institutions today is the "one true way" mentality where everybody has to be right. Muslims are wrong because they don't accept the one true way of Christ. Christians are wrong because they don't accept the one true way of Mohammed. War ensues. I am not a christian, but I am religious, and I find lumping all world religions into one monolithic institution of evil followed by a pack of knuckle dragging illiterates to be very simplistic thinking. As if a totally atheistic society would be some kind of utopia! It's human nature that makes us violent, many times religion is merely an excuse.

Ladysekhmet · Post by **Ladysekhmet** » 2002-07-21 06:11am

I agree that faith-based initiative is a very bad idea; seems everybody is against it! I recently read an article where a group of protestant ministers who were polled were against faith-based initiative because they were afraid that all us darned Athiests, Wiccans, Druids, Satanists, and Voodoo practicioners would form Churches and have a grab at their money! Telling, isn't it? I'll try and scrounge the article up again...

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2002-07-21 08:34am

Well some religions are better than others when it comes to wars

Buddism for example its hard to justife any sort of Violence aginst anyone by that Religion, Hindiusm as well a bit of a toughly(But Hindius seem to be able to get around it)
The problem with Judism, Christianaity and Islam is they right up front say go forth and conquer the land but don't kill anyone

Err.. ok,
A paper I read a few years back stated in the Koran there are eight don't hurt people for every one conquer the world, Christianity its three conquer the worlds for every don;t hurt and Judisum weighs in at dead even
One don't hurt for every conquer
Just a little somthing to think about

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2002-07-21 10:21am

Ladysekhmet wrote:I think the problem with a lot of religious institutions today is the "one true way" mentality where everybody has to be right. Muslims are wrong because they don't accept the one true way of Christ. Christians are wrong because they don't accept the one true way of Mohammed. War ensues. I am not a christian, but I am religious, and I find lumping all world religions into one monolithic institution of evil followed by a pack of knuckle dragging illiterates to be very simplistic thinking. As if a totally atheistic society would be some kind of utopia! It's human nature that makes us violent, many times religion is merely an excuse.

I like the way you straddle the fence here. First you point out the biggest reason that religion directly causes conflict, then you complain that people shouldn't blame it for conflict and that it's "merely an excuse". Do you recognize the self-contradiction here?

Would atheism necessarily be a utopia? Of course not. Humans are flawed creatures regardless of belief system (or lack thereof). But that's a deliberately exaggerated and therefore pointless question, isn't it? The real question is: if Judeo-Christianity-Islam went away tomorrow, would there be less conflict? And the answer is yes. There would be less conflict without religion. Not necessarily utopia, but an improvement over the status quo (consider the examples of India/Pakistan and Israel/Palestine).

Wicked Pilot · Post by **Wicked Pilot** » 2002-07-21 11:03am

Darth Wong wrote:Not necessarily utopia, but an improvement over the status quo (consider the examples of India/Pakistan and Israel/Palestine).

and Yugoslavia

and The Sudan

and Northern Ireland

any more?

Oh, and Iceberg, are you sure your dad is a company exec and not simply the guy who scrubs the fish tanks?

His Divine Shadow · Post by **His Divine Shadow** » 2002-07-21 03:19pm

Why don't you people join my religion?
The Divine Order.
Watch the movies LEXX 1-4 for more information

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2002-07-21 03:21pm

I think no oh Holy One but I choose not to worship his divinness due to a slight foot oder problem which should not be possible to exist yet does

His Divine Shadow · Post by **His Divine Shadow** » 2002-07-21 04:01pm

Holo court room
Holo-Defense Attorney: My client (hologram freezes)
Voice: Mr. Bean, troublemaker, Class 7, Orbital 4

Holo-Defense Attorney: Is innocent of the charge of (pauses briefly, then a slight skip) Refusing to join the Divine Order, and throws himself upon the mercy of this court, secure in the knowledge that His Shadow's wisdom will prevail upon these proceedings.

The contraption injects a needle into his head

Computerized Voice: Memory search commencing. On a screen, various images flicker by
On screen:
HDS: Join us.
Bean:I think no oh Holy One but I choose not to worship his divinness due to a slight foot oder problem which should not be possible to exist yet does

Robot hits a button

Computerized Voice: Memory search complete.

Holo-Judge: You (freezes)
Voice: Mr. Bean, troublemaker, Class 7, Orbital 4
Holo-Judge: Have been found guilty of failing to join the Diviner Order due to reasons other than being too decayed to re-animate, you are therefore sentenced to (pause, hologram skips) have your individual life terminated. However, His Merciful Shadow will allow many of your vital organs to live on, as components used in the making of robotic drones. Your usable flesh will be contributed to the Protein Bank, where it will recycled for purposes that serve His Shadow (hologram skips) -poses that serve His Shadow.

Robot flicks a switch. Bea's slab is moved to another rail, and is then being moved to a small chamber wherein there are outlines of a number of organs

Holo-Defense Attorney is replaced by a Cleric

Cleric: In the execution of this sentence, you are hereby cleansed of your crime against the people of the 20,000 Planets, may His Merciful Shadow fall upon you.

The outlines of the organs now have small saws that begin to move...

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2002-07-21 04:09pm

*Walks into the room

Hmm looks like they killed another Clone of me agian

When will you people learn you cant touch somone protected by the divine forces of Irony?

*Snaps his finger and walks away as the body on the slab exiplictly dissaperes and he causesly strolls out a door that was not there a moment ago

His Divine Shadow · Post by **His Divine Shadow** » 2002-07-21 04:16pm

Mr Bean wrote:*Walks into the room

Hmm looks like they killed another Clone of me agian

When will you people learn you cant touch somone protected by the divine forces of Irony?

*Snaps his finger and walks away as the body on the slab exiplictly dissaperes and he causesly strolls out a door that was not there a moment ago

Oh well *sends Kai after Mr. Bean for the purpose of chasing him into a room with these guys*

Fear the people in pink skirts!

XPViking · Post by **XPViking** » 2002-07-21 08:01pm

Well, this thread has gotten rather strange. Go away for two days and look what happens.

XPViking

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

What people see in religion

Faith-Based Initiative