Religion vs Homosexuality

[mrswdk]

I've also got a joke. Three out of four people are hungry, the other one just had dinner and is full.

[PLAYER57832]

nevertheless, i bet one of them lads got it from that movie. 'scuse me, smartypants...

not even close. I am quite old enough to have significant memories that precede the Da Vinci Code.

And... by-the-way, the Da Vinci Code takes a lot of its fiction from Gnostic ideas/texts. Its not all that original, from what I understand, have heard discussed, though I admit I have never bothered reading the book.

[riskllama]

are you a lad?

[DoomYoshi]

I've also got a joke. Three out of four people are hungry, the other one just had dinner and is full.

Can I borrow your sig?

[mrswdk]

I've also got a joke. Three out of four people are hungry, the other one just had dinner and is full.

Can I borrow your sig?

The more the merrier

[Phatscotty]

Here's the deal... Religion has a purpose. That purpose is to lay down some basic guidelines for a society to be possible (in olden times) and for civilization to progress (in olden times). For religion, the #1 goal is to be fruitful and reproduce with the end result being more members of said religion. Virtually ALL religions discourage homosexuality because homosexuals do not usually reproduce. It's not that religions hate homosexuals, it's that religions encourage their religious followers to be fruitful and reproduce.

That might be one reason why homosexuality is discouraged by Religion.

There are likely other reasons as well...

Religions like to have something to rally AGAINST. Religions are stronger when they have an "us versus them" mentality.
Homosexuality has been a nice scape goat for various (not all I'm guessing, but many) religions throughout history.

Good point, but that is actually true about virtually all groups of any kind, not just religions.

[Phatscotty]

Here's the deal... Religion has a purpose. That purpose is to lay down some basic guidelines for a society to be possible (in olden times) and for civilization to progress (in olden times). For religion, the #1 goal is to be fruitful and reproduce with the end result being more members of said religion. Virtually ALL religions discourage homosexuality because homosexuals do not usually reproduce. It's not that religions hate homosexuals, it's that religions encourage their religious followers to be fruitful and reproduce.

So, if I understand this correctly: religion HAD a purpose.

meh....not exactly, but not exactly not either. Of course this is only my opinion and your opinion here. I'd meet you like 15% of the way there, in that religion does not have as much purpose today to as many people today as it did in olden times. However, if you are seriously going to state that religion has zero purpose today, I'll have to make a decision based on your response if I would be simply wasting my time here with you or if we were both actually interested in having a broader discussion on the specific topic matter.

I didn't express any opinion there, that's just how I interpreted your words. I do agree religion can help some, not all, people.

We as a society do need something (at the very least a belief system like secular humanism) to help us keep our baser instincts in check. No?

Yes, it's called the law.

Good thing that corruption is just an imaginary concept

[Phatscotty]

Yeah, there are betters way of persuading someone to behave in a civilized way than threatening that if they're naughty the sky wizard won't bring them any presents.

Like? How about some examples.

The concept of heaven and hell are pretty persuasive, actually.

[mrswdk]

Yeah, there are betters way of persuading someone to behave in a civilized way than threatening that if they're naughty the sky wizard won't bring them any presents.

Like? How about some examples.

As waauw said, it's called the law.

[jimboston]

Religions like to have something to rally AGAINST.

Good point, but that is actually true about virtually all groups of any kind, not just religions.

Maybe large groups... perhaps large groups need an opposition.

Small groups can act without opposition. Like a book-club can act without having opposition.

Groups do need a "goal"... like "Let's go to the Moon."
You have a goal, and you can rally towards that goal.
The "opposition" here might be "lack of knowledge" or "no equipment".

In many cases the "goal" requires opposition.
So a sports team and fans need another sports team to "fight".

... religions without heathens have no goal.
With heathens they have an opposition.

How passionate are religious followers with no opposing religion?

I think we're saying the same thing though.

[jimboston]

Yeah, there are betters way of persuading someone to behave in a civilized way than threatening that if they're naughty the sky wizard won't bring them any presents.

Like? How about some examples.

As waauw said, it's called the law.

Laws can stop extreme behavior.

They don't make us be kind to one another or respect eachother.

Those are social norms, which are easier to get people to go along with if you have religion.

I think most religions are bunk... but I see their value to society.

I am struggling with this idea with my kids. I want them to have Christian "Values"... and I try to demonstrate those. It's easier to impart these when these are reinforced by the our extended social group... and Churches are helpful in that way.

I just hate lying to my kids about the Sky Wizard.

[mrswdk]

Yeah, there are betters way of persuading someone to behave in a civilized way than threatening that if they're naughty the sky wizard won't bring them any presents.

Like? How about some examples.

As waauw said, it's called the law.

Laws can stop extreme behavior.

They don't make us be kind to one another or respect eachother.

If you really believe that there is utility in having a law to enforce certain kinds of respectfulness then you can make such a law. If it has utility then you can justify it by arguing its utility, if you can't think of any argument other than 'Dumbledore said so' then you have to ask yourself why you are so keen for that rule to exist.

The same goes for kids. My parents always taught me that if you are polite, respectful and considerate then people are much more likely to be helpful and cooperative when you need them. If you're nice to people then it's just a lot easier to get stuff done than if you go around acting like a c*nt. Just tell your kids that and there's no need to make up any stories about Santa.

[waauw]

Yeah, there are betters way of persuading someone to behave in a civilized way than threatening that if they're naughty the sky wizard won't bring them any presents.

Like? How about some examples.

As waauw said, it's called the law.

Laws can stop extreme behavior.

They don't make us be kind to one another or respect eachother.

Those are social norms, which are easier to get people to go along with if you have religion.

I think most religions are bunk... but I see their value to society.

You don't need religion anymore. Religion is an old-fashioned method of distribution. The media, the internet and educational systems are much more modern and sophisticated in terms of spreading norms and values.

[jimboston]

If you really believe that there is utility in having a law to enforce certain kinds of respectfulness then you can make such a law. If it has utility then you can justify it by arguing its utility, if you can't think of any argument other than 'Dumbledore said so' then you have to ask yourself why you are so keen for that rule to exist.

The same goes for kids. My parents always taught me that if you are polite, respectful and considerate then people are much more likely to be helpful and cooperative when you need them. If you're nice to people then it's just a lot easier to get stuff done than if you go around acting like a c*nt. Just tell your kids that and there's no need to make up any stories about Santa.

I don't think that you can make a "Law" to enforce politeness or kindness.
I do think the world is a better place when people are polite and kind to eachother.

I don't think it's a "sin" to be rude or impolite in Catholicism, or any other religion I know of.
I am saying that "Christian Values" encourage us to be kind/polite... and that's a good thing.

Yes. I can teach my kids on my own. This can be reinforced by my extended family and by choosing the people we socialize with... i.e. only socialize with people who act in the manner you want to encourage. i know this and do this.

There is a lot of shit in the world... and you can't (and shouldn't) keep it all hidden from your kids.

A parent alone can not teach his/her child all these things if they see peers acting in ways you disapprove. Kids follow their peers (to some extent at least)... and you can try to keep your kid around good influences, but they will be (should be) exposed to other influences... even if just to see how "not" to act.

A church/parish/etc. can HELP reinforce those values that you want to encourage.

Yes... you can do it yourself. Yes... you can put together a social group of like minded friends/family that will support you. A church/parish is (to some extent) a ready-made group that will also support you in this effort. Not only because of the "fear of the flying sky wizard... but also by daily behavior, fund raising events that encourage community / charity, community support-help activities / events, etc.

Being nice does encourage people to help you... but you shouldn't be a nice person just BECAUSE you want people to help you.
That's not the value I am looking to instill in my kids.

I'm not saying that being part of a religious community is the ONLY way to instill in your child values.
I am saying it is one way, and it can be helpful.

Please don't put words in my mouth.

[jimboston]

You don't need religion anymore. Religion is an old-fashioned method of distribution. The media, the internet and educational systems are much more modern and sophisticated in terms of spreading norms and values.

The media - for profit enterprise run by people who want to make money.

The internet - mixed bag. Lots of BS. Lots of people just looking to "get" something. Some groups of online communities that might be helpful in some ways. Not consistent and not reliable.

Educational Systems - In the USA the public system is a joke in many places. We are lucky are kids learn anything. Lots of good dedicated people on the ground... but too many rules, too much BS, too much catering to the lowest common denominator. Kids run amok in many districts and there's little-to-no ability for administration to discipline or control kids who have no values.

The high end private schools are designed entirely to raise the next generation of elites. The high-end private schools around me are also not cheap... you are looking at high schools charging $45K-$50K per year!

The mid-range system (around here anyway) is better. Still not cheap... high schools from $10K-$20K per year. These schools often provide quality education, and teach good values. Because they are private the can have some discipline... and disruptive kids can be ejected. I am looking now at sending my kids to a school in this range. ALL the schools in this area that fit into this category are religious based... i.e. Catholic/Parochial schools, or Jewish. All the "secular" private schools are the high-end kind.

I'm not saying you NEED religion. You do need a "Community". I wish there was a religion for Agnostic Humanists. I may start one. Who's in?

[Bernie Sanders]

You don't need religion anymore. Religion is an old-fashioned method of distribution. The media, the internet and educational systems are much more modern and sophisticated in terms of spreading norms and values.

The media - for profit enterprise run by people who want to make money.

The internet - mixed bag. Lots of BS. Lots of people just looking to "get" something. Some groups of online communities that might be helpful in some ways. Not consistent and not reliable.

Educational Systems - In the USA the public system is a joke in many places. We are lucky are kids learn anything. Lots of good dedicated people on the ground... but too many rules, too much BS, too much catering to the lowest common denominator. Kids run amok in many districts and there's little-to-no ability for administration to discipline or control kids who have no values.

The high end private schools are designed entirely to raise the next generation of elites. The high-end private schools around me are also not cheap... you are looking at high schools charging $45K-$50K per year!

The mid-range system (around here anyway) is better. Still not cheap... high schools from $10K-$20K per year. These schools often provide quality education, and teach good values. Because they are private the can have some discipline... and disruptive kids can be ejected. I am looking now at sending my kids to a school in this range. ALL the schools in this area that fit into this category are religious based... i.e. Catholic/Parochial schools, or Jewish. All the "secular" private schools are the high-end kind.

I'm not saying you NEED religion. You do need a "Community". I wish there was a religion for Agnostic Humanists. I may start one. Who's in?

Who would be the leader of said group? He/She would have to be very vocal, awe inspiring and make great kool-aid.

[mrswdk]

If you really believe that there is utility in having a law to enforce certain kinds of respectfulness then you can make such a law. If it has utility then you can justify it by arguing its utility, if you can't think of any argument other than 'Dumbledore said so' then you have to ask yourself why you are so keen for that rule to exist.

The same goes for kids. My parents always taught me that if you are polite, respectful and considerate then people are much more likely to be helpful and cooperative when you need them. If you're nice to people then it's just a lot easier to get stuff done than if you go around acting like a c*nt. Just tell your kids that and there's no need to make up any stories about Santa.

I don't think that you can make a "Law" to enforce politeness or kindness.

You can make laws for specific instances of impoliteness. Just like there is no law that says 'no lying', but there are laws against breaking contractual promises, libel/slander, and so on.

I do think the world is a better place when people are polite and kind to each other.

I don't think it's a "sin" to be rude or impolite in Catholicism, or any other religion I know of.
I am saying that "Christian Values" encourage us to be kind/polite... and that's a good thing.

Well like I just said, my parents instilled that approach in me without ever arguing religion or religious values.

Being nice does encourage people to help you... but you shouldn't be a nice person just BECAUSE you want people to help you.
That's not the value I am looking to instill in my kids.

You obviously have a reason for wanting them to behave that way. Explain that reason to them, rather than making up crap about a god that you appear to not actually believe in.

I mean, if you can subscribe to those values without believing in God then why can't your children too?

I'm not saying that being part of a religious community is the ONLY way to instill in your child values.
I am saying it is one way, and it can be helpful.

Please don't put words in my mouth.

I never said that you said religion is the only way. I'm just saying that it is perfectly possible to instill that sort of behavior in your child without using religion, so there's no need to resort to religion.

[waauw]

I'm not saying that being part of a religious community is the ONLY way to instill in your child values.
I am saying it is one way, and it can be helpful.

Please don't put words in my mouth.

I never said that you said religion is the only way.

Yeah that's my bad. I put those words in his mouth and I guess he forgot to give me credit for it

[mrswdk]

I'm not saying that being part of a religious community is the ONLY way to instill in your child values.
I am saying it is one way, and it can be helpful.

Please don't put words in my mouth.

I never said that you said religion is the only way.

Yeah that's my bad. I put those words in his mouth and I guess he forgot to give me credit for it

Ha, all the credit for me and none for you. Eat my dust

[jimboston]

You can make laws for specific instances of impoliteness. Just like there is no law that says 'no lying', but there are laws against breaking contractual promises, libel/slander, and so on.

I don't think it's practical. Nor do I want Gov't controlling every interaction.

The church was like the Gov't in the Middle Ages, and that was not good.

Combining the seperate "roles" of Gov't/Religion into just Gov't isn't a good idea.
Look at Chine, USSR, etc.

Well like I just said, my parents instilled that approach in me without ever arguing religion or religious values.

I never said it was impossible without religion. I said religious communities (as well as other communities) make it easier.

You obviously have a reason for wanting them to behave that way. Explain that reason to them, rather than making up crap about a god that you appear to not actually believe in.

Because the world is a better place when we treat each other kindly and be polite to each other.

I mean, if you can subscribe to those values without believing in God then why can't your children too?

1) They can.
2) I wasn't born this way... I was raised with those Christian values, supported in part by my local Catholic Parish.
I can to my enlightenment later. I'm sure that it's better for some people to believe / have faith... so I don't know if everyone can "handle the truth" so to speak. (Yes. That means I think I am smarter than a lot of people. I also think it means a lot of people prefer to think about other shit... and just don't care either way.)
3) I'm not saying you can't raise your kids (with values) without this type of community. I'm sure you can. The community helps. I also see a lot of people doing a shitty job raising their kids... and so I feel society is "better" with some foundation.

I never said that you said religion is the only way. I'm just saying that it is perfectly possible to instill that sort of behavior in your child without using religion, so there's no need to resort to religion.

So you want to take religion away from people?

... how about this for a bottom line?

Religion was created to control the masses. The masses aren't ready to live in a 100% secular world.
Maybe we will evolve there. We need baby steps for these idiots. If you go too fast, you risk causing
all kinds of turmoil.

[tzor]

You don't need religion anymore. Religion is an old-fashioned method of distribution. The media, the internet and educational systems are much more modern and sophisticated in terms of spreading norms and values.

Fascinating man ... just fascinating

The media ... THEY SUCK
The internet ... THEY SUCK TOO
The "educational system" ... THEY SUCK TOO

[waauw]

You don't need religion anymore. Religion is an old-fashioned method of distribution. The media, the internet and educational systems are much more modern and sophisticated in terms of spreading norms and values.

Fascinating man ... just fascinating

The media ... THEY SUCK
The internet ... THEY SUCK TOO
The "educational system" ... THEY SUCK TOO

my my, your argumentation is just dripping with intricacy.

[tzor]

Religion was created to control the masses. The masses aren't ready to live in a 100% secular world.
Maybe we will evolve there. We need baby steps for these idiots. If you go too fast, you risk causing
all kinds of turmoil.

Typical communist crap. Religion wasn't created ...

This is followed by typical utopian nonsense ...

Perhaps the "idiots" know something you don't know.

It's OK to be angry at that ...

[Bernie Sanders]

You don't need religion anymore. Religion is an old-fashioned method of distribution. The media, the internet and educational systems are much more modern and sophisticated in terms of spreading norms and values.

Fascinating man ... just fascinating

The media ... THEY SUCK
The internet ... THEY SUCK TOO
The "educational system" ... THEY SUCK TOO

[Bernie Sanders]

Religion was created to control the masses. The masses aren't ready to live in a 100% secular world.
Maybe we will evolve there. We need baby steps for these idiots. If you go too fast, you risk causing
all kinds of turmoil.

Typical communist crap. Religion wasn't created ...

This is followed by typical utopian nonsense ...

Perhaps the "idiots" know something you don't know.

It's OK to be angry at that ...