AR Might End Up With A Satan Statue On Its Capitol Grounds

[Jub]

Again: Since when is that a valid support for the argument that Christianity is infantile crap? I am not in favor of the Church either, but I recognize that many things they do (like for example currently helping muslim refugees) are very far removed from infantile crap.

None of that has shit to do with religion, you can find examples of secular groups doing the same. If the world had been secular the past 2,000+ years we'd see the same things without the childish fights over a woman's body and gay marriage and Africa wouldn't be suffering under the Catholic teachings about condoms. So yeah, for all the good religious people might do the religion itself has jack and shit to do with it leaving only the negative things on the balance sheet.

[Thanas]

Again: Since when is that a valid support for the argument that Christianity is infantile crap? I am not in favor of the Church either, but I recognize that many things they do (like for example currently helping muslim refugees) are very far removed from infantile crap.

None of that has shit to do with religion, you can find examples of secular groups doing the same.

So what? I'll tell you right now, if there would be no church charity it would leave a pretty big hole.

If the world had been secular the past 2,000+ years we'd see the same things without the childish fights over a woman's body and gay marriage and Africa wouldn't be suffering under the Catholic teachings about condoms.

Indeed, because certainly there are no other reasons than religious ones for capturing/colonizing/enslaving others.

[Jub]

So what? I'll tell you right now, if there would be no church charity it would leave a pretty big hole.

Yes, but that is only due to the length of time where church sponsored charity's were the only charities. Remove religion and secular practices would have risen up to fill the gap.

Indeed, because certainly there are no other reasons than religious ones for capturing/colonizing/enslaving others.

Obviously any group of people will do some bad things, but when was the last time you saw somebody blowing up abortion clinics or destroying historic sites in the name of science?

[Thanas]

So what? I'll tell you right now, if there would be no church charity it would leave a pretty big hole.

Yes, but that is only due to the length of time where church sponsored charity's were the only charities.

Uhh....many of the current church charities have a fairly short history. Caritas is much younger than the socialist charities for example.

Remove religion and secular practices would have risen up to fill the gap.

I don't see it for the simple reasons that they did not arise in that big a fashion when there was no church earlier.

Obviously any group of people will do some bad things, but when was the last time you saw somebody blowing up abortion clinics or destroying historic sites in the name of science?

Because a few nutjubs = the whole religion.

[Channel72]

We'll never know to what extent secular organizations may or may not have formed charity organizations over the last thousand years if the Catholic/Protestant churches didn't exist. If those churches didn't exist, and there was no other religious institution to carry out the functions they provided, history would be so radically different that it's not even worth talking about whether or not (or what sort of) charity services may have appeared.

Certainly, when you look at something like the Franciscan order, their core doctrines about poverty provided a logical impulse to create charities, whereas a secular organization wouldn't necessarily have that ideology. Most secular "charities" that have existed are national/state governments, whose reason for existing includes providing services for the citizenry.

Most private secular charities have a very narrow-focus (gay rights, cancer research, etc.) rather than being a general charity for relieving poverty. To this day it seems that most charities which specifically target poverty are religious charities, like the Red Cross/Crescent, etc.

[Jub]

Uhh....many of the current church charities have a fairly short history. Caritas is much younger than the socialist charities for example.

The exact charity doesn't really matter when placed next to the idea that the church would fulfill the functions of modern day charities. If you were poor and in need of aid or sanctuary you went to the church. As a church goer you paid your tithes and gave over your time and knew that some of it would go back to the community.

I don't see it for the simple reasons that they did not arise in that big a fashion when there was no church earlier.

The idea of organized charity could have arisen independent of the church, in our history it never had the chance to do so.

Because a few nutjubs = the whole religion.

I'm so glad that the middle east only has an issue with a handful of nutjobs right now, those refugees must just be running from a couple of dudes. Even if as a percentage the religious as a whole aren't nuts the percentage of nuts willing to kill/die for their faith is higher than the number willing to do the same for, say, secular humanism. You have to be at least a little nuts to believe in a magic sky fairy.

Most private secular charities have a very narrow-focus (gay rights, cancer research, etc.) rather than being a general charity for relieving poverty. To this day it seems that most charities which specifically target poverty are religious charities, like the Red Cross/Crescent, etc.

There's less need for those services to be replicated so it makes the most sense for a secular cause to target narrower issues not covered by a church or government. I think as we see religion fall away secular organizations and community groups will fill the gap. Ideally the government would, in a non-corrupt way, centralize things currently run by private charities so we could see some economy of scale.

[Channel72]

You have to be at least a little nuts to believe in a magic sky fairy.

Meh... if "nuts" is a synonym for "insane", and you're applying that word to like, 90% of humanity, then the word loses a lot of meaning. Unless you're talking about clinical insanity, in which case your sentence is simply wrong, since most humans believe in God, but are not clinically insane.

Believing in God doesn't mean you're insane - it simply means you've been conditioned to believe that way. Regardless, belief in divine beings seems to be a very likely anthropological outcome for any group of humans, since humans tend to detect agency and purpose all throughout the natural world, and it's easy to go from detecting agency/purpose to anthropomorphizing natural forces like the weather. Eventually codified beliefs and rituals form around these ideas, and then they're sanctified and replicated for generations.

Also, given a blank-slate of knowledge as a starting point, and being dropped into the African Savannah as a bipedal primate, it doesn't seem that unreasonable to start suspecting that the natural world around you is controlled by intelligent forces who have agendas of their own - since your fellow humans, as well as other animals, obviously act with purpose and agency - so maybe the wind and the trees, and the stars, and even abstractions like craftwork and hunting do also, except these agencies are beyond your understanding. Maybe you can communicate with them somehow - (I remember that time that one guy did a dance, and then our next hunt went really well - I guess maybe if you dance in a certain way you can communicate with the gods of hunting) - etc.

[Jub]

Believing in God doesn't mean you're insane - it simply means you've been conditioned to believe that way. Regardless, belief in divine beings seems to be a very likely anthropological outcome for any group of humans, since humans tend to detect agency and purpose all throughout the natural world, and it's easy to go from detecting agency/purpose to anthropomorphizing natural forces like the weather. Eventually codified beliefs and rituals form around these ideas, and then they're sanctified and replicated for generations.

It's still crazy to think that god killed his son, created entirely for that purpose, for your sins and that somehow thinking about him in a special way will allow you to live forever. If that isn't your brand of nuts how about we can pick any myth that has no basis in the observable world around us. Just because it was easy for mankind to think this way before science, doesn't mean it's excusable now.

[Ahriman238]

So is there anything about satanism that doesn´t make it infantile crap?

You might be surprised. There's a lot of satanists who take their shtick to varying degrees of seriousness. Most of the ones I know are closer to aggressively atheistic with a side-order of pointing out and exploiting religious hypocrisy. For instance, at the moment the Satanic Temple in Missouri is smacking the state with a lawsuit, claiming that the 72 hour waiting period for an abortion (at the state's sole clinic) is against their religion and some of its core tenets, that a person's body is subject to their own will and theirs alone. Hence the Missouri RFRA should allow for a religious exemption.

[Elheru Aran]

Satanists are an interesting bunch. You have the small percentage that are 100% serious about the whole summoning demons, laying down curses, attaining a Lower Power or whatever. Another percentage do that, but they're a little more tongue in cheek, turning Pascal's Wager on its head. The rest are atheists with a funny name and varying degrees of seriousness.

Really, it's just another religion, if you think about it...

[cmdrjones]

Believing in God doesn't mean you're insane - it simply means you've been conditioned to believe that way. Regardless, belief in divine beings seems to be a very likely anthropological outcome for any group of humans, since humans tend to detect agency and purpose all throughout the natural world, and it's easy to go from detecting agency/purpose to anthropomorphizing natural forces like the weather. Eventually codified beliefs and rituals form around these ideas, and then they're sanctified and replicated for generations.

It's still crazy to think that god killed his son, created entirely for that purpose, for your sins and that somehow thinking about him in a special way will allow you to live forever. If that isn't your brand of nuts how about we can pick any myth that has no basis in the observable world around us. Just because it was easy for mankind to think this way before science, doesn't mean it's excusable now.

hey, y'know, 'non-sense to the Greeks' and all that.

[salm]

I'm sure some of them believe at least as much as the average hedging their bets Christian does.

According to the article they don´t believe. They are apparently atheists.

Even if they don't, what wittier form of protest would you suggest they try to achieve the same effect?

I wouldn´t suggest anything because comming up with witty satire is time consuming. I wouldn´t use the first dumb joke that crossed my mind and could just as well be made up by a toddler.

[Soontir C'boath]

I'm sure some of them believe at least as much as the average hedging their bets Christian does.

According to the article they don´t believe. They are apparently atheists.

Read again, it was in reference to the 7 tenants that they follow.

I wouldn´t suggest anything because comming up with witty satire is time consuming. I wouldn´t use the first dumb joke that crossed my mind and could just as well be made up by a toddler.

They have already spent $100k constructing a statue of him a long time ago that was intended to be unveiled in Oklahoma before their Supreme Court ruled the 10 Commandments there unconstitutional. I'd say they are quite serious in their intention to make sure freedom of religion and separation of church and state are held up. Also, they are pretty proactive in other states and issues including Florida's dissemination of religious materials in school and fighting for a Missouri's women right to an abortion without the rules put in placed by the state.