AnonTalk BBS

Topic: How would you define "religion"?

Anonymous A started this topic 9 months (2009-07-04 06:51:?? UTC) ago (#28,875):

The core of my definition would be "worship of mystery". So the definition could be "a human activity in which the individual worships that which they consider unknown, mysterious, or sacred."

Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 9 months (2009-07-04 07:30:?? UTC) ago, 39 minutes later (#172,799):

That definition would exclude Zen and Buddhism.

Additionally, science would be included in the definition since most scientists are obsessed with mysteries that needs to be unraveled.

As for the sacred, ground zero at 9/11 and USS Arizona at pearl harbor are considered sacred.

Anonymous B double-posted this 9 months (2009-07-04 07:34:?? UTC) ago, 4 minutes later, 43 minutes past creation (#172,803):

My definition would be something that requires faith, dedication, lack of critical questioning of the flaws, ritual observance of rites and a set of beliefs and principles with general consensus… Especially if it involves their own set of moral codes or justice.

Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 9 months (2009-07-04 07:59:?? UTC) ago, 25 minutes later, 1 hour past creation (#172,814):

Religion is just Grimm's fairy tales for grownups as far as I'm concerned.

Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 9 months (2009-07-04 08:10:?? UTC) ago, 11 minutes later, 1 hour past creation (#172,817):

Religion isn't necessarily worshiping something, but it always involves faith in something.

Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 9 months (2009-07-04 08:17:?? UTC) ago, 7 minutes later, 1 hour past creation (#172,822):

Religion doesn't require faith or worship. A religion is a practice. It has a dogma and patterns that are followed or repeated. This is why modern atheism is considered a religion.

Anonymous B replied with this 9 months (2009-07-04 08:19:?? UTC) ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour past creation (#172,824):

@previous

"Patterns that are followed or repeated. This is why modern atheism is considered a religion."

Uh - What patterns?

There are no congregation, no rituals or rites… I'm curious to what you meant.

Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 9 months (2009-07-04 08:19:?? UTC) ago, 13 seconds later, 1 hour past creation (#172,825):

@172,822

> This is why modern atheism is considered a religion.

Except it isn't, by anyone credible. I suppose you think science is a religion, too?

Anonymous D replied with this 9 months (2009-07-04 08:25:?? UTC) ago, 6 minutes later, 2 hours past creation (#172,831):

@172,822

Atheism doesn't have repeated practices or anything that religion does. Atheism is thinking for yourself and using science, logic, and common sense to figure things out. Atheism is NOT a religion.

Anonymous E replied with this 9 months (2009-07-04 08:30:?? UTC) ago, 5 minutes later, 2 hours past creation (#172,838):

@previous

> Atheism is thinking for yourself and using science, logic, and common sense to figure things out.

Every atheist uses this very same line, which is exactly my point. Atheists regurgitate the same lines, they use the same buzzwords (i.e. rational, bigot, etc.), they have a messiah (Richard Dawkins), they even have symbols and churches now. In reality, atheism is a full blown religion whether you like it or not. I know that by definition it should not be, but sadly it is.

Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 9 months (2009-07-04 08:37:?? UTC) ago, 7 minutes later, 2 hours past creation (#172,842):

@previous

You'll find very few people who worship Dawkins. Most of them hold him in high respect, because he's so vocal and he's very efficient at dismantling religion. However, the people who have shrines to him, say prayers to him, and kill fags in his name are the exception, not the rule, like it is with most religions. As such, he cannot be called the Atheist Messiah.

Anonymous B replied with this 9 months (2009-07-04 08:38:?? UTC) ago, 57 seconds later, 2 hours past creation (#172,843):

Every Democrats uses this very same line, which is exactly my point. They regurgitate the same lines, they use the same buzzwords (i.e. Hope, Change, etc.), They have a messiah (Barack Obama), they even have symbols and churches now. In reality, Democrats is a full blown religion whether you like it or not. I know that by definition, it should not be, but it sadly is.

Are you seeing my point? Group mentality is NOT religion.

Anonymous E replied with this 9 months (2009-07-04 09:01:?? UTC) ago, 23 minutes later, 2 hours past creation (#172,859):

@previous

Please leave your failchan memes at the door, thanks. Also, democrats don't have churches while atheists do, and being a democrat isn't a religious orientation while atheism is. Oddly enough, if you changed your failchan meme to be about liberalism, it pretty much would count as a religion or at least a mental disorder.

Anonymous F replied with this 9 months (2009-07-04 09:02:?? UTC) ago, 59 seconds later, 2 hours past creation (#172,863):

As a side note, I always find it interesting when religious people try to discredit atheism by claiming it's another religion — it's like they know, deep in their minds, that religions are intellectually shallow. That, or they simply aren't capable of comprehending atheist and anti-religious sentiments as being anything other than a competing religion.

Anonymous B replied with this 9 months (2009-07-04 09:04:?? UTC) ago, 2 minutes later, 2 hours past creation (#172,865):

@172,859

Frig - That hurts, I took the time to type that out and It should be a original work. That's not a meme. I was originally going to do republicans and using Limbaugh as the messiah then I realized, Obama was constantly referred as that and I thought it would drive home the point better.

Anonymous E replied with this 9 months (2009-07-04 09:10:?? UTC) ago, 6 minutes later, 2 hours past creation (#172,870):

@172,863

Correct me if I'm wrong but don't atheists specifically target or compare themselves to Christianity in practically every statement they make in an attempt to preach their dogma? I rarely, if ever, hear religious people compare themselves to atheists. It's almost as if atheists create this enemy that doesn't exist just so that when people call them out on their preaching and dogma, the atheist can turn around and pretend they're speaking from a reactionary stand-point, hahaha.

Anonymous G replied with this 9 months (2009-07-04 09:44:?? UTC) ago, 34 minutes later, 3 hours past creation (#172,882):

@previous

There is no atheist dogma. Your comparison fails.

Anonymous F replied with this 9 months (2009-07-04 09:46:?? UTC) ago, 2 minutes later, 3 hours past creation (#172,885):

@172,859

> Also, democrats don't have churches while atheists do

Atheists have to go to church? Well nobody told me! Fuck this, I didn't rebel against my parents and community leaders just to go to stupid church again!

> [A]nd being a democrat isn't a religious orientation while atheism is.

"Religious orientation" is not equivalent to a religion. Having an opinion about McDonald's customers does not make one a customer of McDonald's.

> [L]iberalism, it pretty much would count as a religion or at least a mental disorder.

Why don't you tell us about whatever political philosophy you subscribe to? I'm sure it's bulletproof and impossible to criticize.

Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 9 months (2009-07-04 10:19:?? UTC) ago, 32 minutes later, 3 hours past creation (#172,904):

@172,838

> > Atheism is thinking for yourself and using science, logic, and common sense to figure things out.

Right. Thus atheism is a way of thinking. One I suppose could argue that Christianity is as well because atheist think "Logic first, faith last" while Christians think "Faith first, logic last" which would make it simply two opposing religions however, Christianity has a hierarchical structure, it has infrastructure, it is legally seen as a religion, it has a clear leader and it own specific religious practices and lore. Atheism has exactly none of that. The most we have are several radio stations that talk from the atheist point of view. We have no leader because an atheist does not subscribe to a viewpoint just because he should. If he does he is a hipster and nothing more.

So now lets look at the next piece of evidence here.

> Every atheist uses this very same line, which is exactly my point. Atheists regurgitate the same lines, they use the same buzzwords (i.e. rational, bigot, etc.), they have a messiah (Richard Dawkins), they even have symbols and churches now. In reality, atheism is a full blown religion whether you like it or not. I know that by definition it should not be, but sadly it is.

I use the word rational however I have yet needed to use the word bigot in a religious sense. I have no idea who this Richard Dawkins fellow is and have no wish to find out due to my atheism stemming from my own conclusions on religion.
What would the symbol of atheism be ?
And what kind of church would we have ? Bear in mind a discussion or debate club would not count. It would have to be a place dedicated solely to atheistic practice and NOTHING else. A place where atheist go to NOT BELIEVE…. Now honestly, you sound rather educated or at least like a clever person but you should work harder when you make a post. Do not drop facts without any proof because that serves to be counter-productive to the discussion.

And to the topic question. I will first clarify a certain idea of mine. Faith and religion are fundamentally different. A person can be a faithful Cristian and still get along great with an atheist however, if we make the same Cristian religiously dogmatic there is almost no chance of even slight tolerance for one another. Faith in an idea is an admirable trait, blind faith in that idea is an equivalent of moral suicide.
So my definition of religion is something of a traders guild of ideas. And the different trade guilds battle out to control the market. Pretty much all it really is in essence.

Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 9 months (2009-07-04 12:34:?? UTC) ago, 2 hours later, 6 hours past creation (#172,928):

It's a belief system.

Anonymous B replied with this 9 months (2009-07-04 18:19:?? UTC) ago, 6 hours later, 11 hours past creation (#173,069):

A belief system?

Well slap me silly and call me Susan, Super string theory is a religion!

Anonymous E replied with this 9 months (2009-07-04 19:05:?? UTC) ago, 46 minutes later, 12 hours past creation (#173,111):

@172,904

http://firstchurchofatheism.com/

Here you go, my friend. Full blown church with practices and symbols all in one page. There are many more, by the way.

Anonymous B replied with this 9 months (2009-07-04 19:11:?? UTC) ago, 6 minutes later, 12 hours past creation (#173,117):

I am disappointed about that - That ignores what atheism is about, personal choice and freedom from religion.

Anonymous B double-posted this 9 months (2009-07-04 19:15:?? UTC) ago, 4 minutes later, 12 hours past creation (#173,119):

After review of the site, I have determined the reason behind it's existence:

"What we need is a scientific community willing to step up to the plate. One willing to be proactive in politics, in the local community, and one on one with the people … What we need are organized efforts in politics to counter the pro-religious influence. What we need is rational thinking based alternatives to churches, religious holidays, bibles, missionaries, private schools, and community support groups."

In short, it's a special interest group. How about that - an atheist church formed to fight other church's influence. That's counterproductive.

Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 9 months (2009-07-04 19:15:?? UTC) ago, 22 seconds later, 12 hours past creation (#173,120):

The best definition of religion I can think of is "bullshit".

Anonymous K joined in and replied with this 9 months (2009-07-05 15:07:?? UTC) ago, 20 hours later, 1 day past creation (#173,656):

Religion = Philosophical ideology which fills the gaps not explained by science.

This is in my opinion, the best of them. Because, religion does actually evolve.

Thousands of years ago, humans were praying to the sun and the planets. Because we didn't knew a thing about cosmical objects.
Then they've started praying to deities who made us humans from soil. Because we didn't comprehend the ideas of evolution.
We should now believe in a God who started everything, who created the universe, the reality, time, space, physical and chemical forces, matter and energy. At least, until we reveal new informations about them.

Everything else, like dogmas and morals are just added by humans using common sense.

Anonymous D replied with this 8 months (2009-07-08 09:14:?? UTC) ago, 3 days later, 4 days past creation (#175,740):

@previous

Except that religion doesn't just fill the gaps of human knowledge. Despite proof most religions choose to still believe in completely ludicrous things.

© AnonTalk.com 2008–2010