Granny Danger Posted September 3 Share Posted September 3 26 minutes ago, CityDave94 said: Plenty of bigots who don't follow any religion. That’s true. But organised religions who, for example, claim that homosexuality is inherently wrong and should be illegal takes that bigotry to a different level. As do those who want to suppress women and proscribe their reproductive rights. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GordonS Posted September 3 Share Posted September 3 6 hours ago, Salt n Vinegar said: Good and evil, for me, boils down to the extent to which people uphold the golden rule... "dinnae dae that, urrul dae it tae you". That's called the golden rule and it doesn't stand up to scrutiny. An extreme religious homophobe would say that if they had sex with a with someone of the same sex as them, they should be stoned to death. Does that make it ok for them to stone gay people to death? Most people who do things we would consider bad don't go around thinking they're bad. They have justifications for them and think other people do, or should, live their lives the same way. We like different things, we hate different things, so if we treat others the way we want to be treated, we're not treating them the way they want to be treated. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coprolite Posted September 3 Author Share Posted September 3 16 minutes ago, Fullerene said: Maybe but I know some people who think 56 is the answer and refuse to be in the same room as anyone who thinks 42 is the answer. I seriously think I have a disorder. My first response to that was “well at least it’s a multiple of seven”, which somehow made it ok, even though it was only a nonsensical exchange with nerd culture references. Anyway, fecking 56ers, probably still insisting on literal transubstantiation 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DA Baracus Posted September 3 Share Posted September 3 28 minutes ago, Granny Danger said: As do those who want to suppress women and proscribe their reproductive rights. Not just want but are/have actually doing/done that 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DA Baracus Posted September 3 Share Posted September 3 Laughing at religion isn't bigotry. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richey Edwards Posted September 3 Share Posted September 3 You shut the f**k up John Motson. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CityDave94 Posted September 3 Share Posted September 3 1 minute ago, Granny Danger said: That’s true. But organised religions who, for example, claim that homosexuality is inherently wrong and should be illegal takes that bigotry to a different level. As do those who want to suppress women and proscribe their reproductive rights. Is that all organised religions? Isn't that individuals and their interpretation rather than the religion itself since people have to have the responsibility for their own choices and actions. A religion is not a physical thing, it doesn't make you do anything. You could read something from the Bible and then someone else could read the same thing and come away with a completely different point of view of what you both have just read. its what an individual makes of it. Be it peaceful contentment or someone on a raging psychotic powertrip. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DA Baracus Posted September 3 Share Posted September 3 7 minutes ago, CityDave94 said: Is that all organised religions? Isn't that individuals and their interpretation rather than the religion itself since people have to have the responsibility for their own choices and actions. A religion is not a physical thing, it doesn't make you do anything. You could read something from the Bible and then someone else could read the same thing and come away with a completely different point of view of what you both have just read. its what an individual makes of it. Be it peaceful contentment or someone on a raging psychotic powertrip. What about preachers/ministers/priests etc? They tell folk what to think and most of their audience believe it instantly. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CityDave94 Posted September 3 Share Posted September 3 Just now, DA Baracus said: What about preachers/ministers/priests etc? They tell folk what to think and most of their audience believe it instantly. Same with social media and some of the influencers and experts on there. Whats the difference? -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted September 3 Share Posted September 3 36 minutes ago, CityDave94 said: Is that all organised religions? Isn't that individuals and their interpretation rather than the religion itself since people have to have the responsibility for their own choices and actions. A religion is not a physical thing, it doesn't make you do anything. You could read something from the Bible and then someone else could read the same thing and come away with a completely different point of view of what you both have just read. its what an individual makes of it. Be it peaceful contentment or someone on a raging psychotic powertrip. You’re suggesting that organised religions do not have hierarchical structures. You know that’s not the case. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Black Flag Posted September 3 Share Posted September 3 2000 years and everyone got it all wrong. Jesus was an Anarchist and very misunderstood. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CityDave94 Posted September 3 Share Posted September 3 8 minutes ago, Granny Danger said: You’re suggesting that organised religions do not have hierarchical structures. You know that’s not the case. Is that a straw man argument? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DA Baracus Posted September 3 Share Posted September 3 (edited) 41 minutes ago, CityDave94 said: Same with social media and some of the influencers and experts on there. Whats the difference? Social media 'influencers' don't try and get peoples' rights taken away. Edited September 3 by DA Baracus 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CityDave94 Posted September 3 Share Posted September 3 1 minute ago, DA Baracus said: Social media 'influencers' don't try and get peoples' rights taken away. Depends on if they are lobbying for it. I should have mentioned mainstream media along with social media. I hope your not underestimating the power of media, both social and mainstream in influencing the public opinion on sensitive topics. Far more powerful than the various churches in the UK by some distance. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DA Posted September 3 Share Posted September 3 1 hour ago, Granny Danger said: That’s true. But organised religions who, for example, claim that homosexuality is inherently wrong and should be illegal takes that bigotry to a different level. As do those who want to suppress women and proscribe their reproductive rights. That'll be all of them, then. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DA Baracus Posted September 3 Share Posted September 3 23 minutes ago, CityDave94 said: Depends on if they are lobbying for it. I should have mentioned mainstream media along with social media. I hope your not underestimating the power of media, both social and mainstream in influencing the public opinion on sensitive topics. Far more powerful than the various churches in the UK by some distance. True, but not sure many folk are worshiping the Daily Mail. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carpetmonster Posted September 3 Share Posted September 3 If God isn’t real why didn’t I exclaim ‘science limping f**k’ when confronted with the contents of the boy’s nappy this morning? Checkmate libtards. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coprolite Posted September 3 Author Share Posted September 3 1 hour ago, CityDave94 said: Is that all organised religions? Isn't that individuals and their interpretation rather than the religion itself since people have to have the responsibility for their own choices and actions. A religion is not a physical thing, it doesn't make you do anything. You could read something from the Bible and then someone else could read the same thing and come away with a completely different point of view of what you both have just read. its what an individual makes of it. Be it peaceful contentment or someone on a raging psychotic powertrip. A religion can be intertwined with a state, whether as part of the apparatus of state (e.g Iran) or as a strong influence (loads of places - very recently including Western Democracies). Religious morality isn't just a suggestion and is enforced by the same legal system the state uses for more secular types of crime. It also influences provision and uptake of healthcare and education. I don't think an individual girl in Helmand can individually go "f**k this islam shite, i'm going to school and i'll get a nice bacon sannie on the way" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimbaxters Posted September 3 Share Posted September 3 11 minutes ago, DA Baracus said: True, but not sure many folk are worshiping the Daily Mail. In the broader sense, worship means to love, adore or very much like something or someone. That takes many forms. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richey Edwards Posted September 3 Share Posted September 3 If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.