'Facebook blasphemer' given death penalty

Deadmanza said:
Retards being retards. Put to death for speaking badly about imaginary figures. Eish. I better not speak badly about Mickey mouse :wtf:
Click to expand...

You will get banned. And some old Toppies from PE are coming to visit you with nailed baseball-bats.
 
Are the gods easily hurt/offended when humans call them bad names? And can they not defend themselves?

Omnipotent or impotent.
 
konfab said:
That is why I said it is mostly. Apart from the Jehovah's witness one which is literally self corrective in nature, all of those things you mentioned would be classified as sinful by most religions. Especially nowadays.


Not in the West in 2017. Mostly because it has (sort of) managed to keep with the times.
Click to expand...

The point isn't whether the examples are considered sinful, its whether religion causes harm or not? All of those examples, and there are countless more, speak to the harm that religion causes.
 
vic777 said:
The point isn't whether the examples are considered sinful, its whether religion causes harm or not? All of those examples, and there are countless more, speak to the harm that religion causes.
Click to expand...

If you want to speak about the harm that religion causes, then you also have to speak about the harm that the lack of religion causes as well. Religion provides an answer to the very difficult problem of existence that we have as social animals. If you don't solve it, you and your society will become nihilistic (meaning nothing matters), if you just

Nietzsche said: "God is dead, and we have killed him", that claim he made in the late 19th century. He made it because he saw that scientific enlightenment was killing off people's belief in religion, based on that assumption, he predicted that there would be wars of totalitarianism in the next century. He then further predicted that in the 21st century, people would find a new religion of sorts. That has sort of come true with environmentalism.

This stuff is very interesting and explains a lot of the reasons why we have certain types of problems in society. If it interests you, you should take some time to listen to a lecture series by Jordan Peterson where he delves into the evolution of social behaviours, which eventually culminates into monotheism.

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL22J3VaeABQAT-0aSPq-OKOpQlHyR4k5h[video]https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL22J3VaeABQAT-0aSPq-OKOpQlHyR4k5h[/video]
 
So long as they keep their crazy religions in their own country and don't export the madness then it's all good.
 
konfab said:
If you want to speak about the harm that religion causes, then you also have to speak about the harm that the lack of religion causes as well. Religion provides an answer to the very difficult problem of existence that we have as social animals. If you don't solve it, you and your society will become nihilistic (meaning nothing matters), if you just

Nietzsche said: "God is dead, and we have killed him", that claim he made in the late 19th century. He made it because he saw that scientific enlightenment was killing off people's belief in religion, based on that assumption, he predicted that there would be wars of totalitarianism in the next century. He then further predicted that in the 21st century, people would find a new religion of sorts. That has sort of come true with environmentalism.

This stuff is very interesting and explains a lot of the reasons why we have certain types of problems in society. If it interests you, you should take some time to listen to a lecture series by Jordan Peterson where he delves into the evolution of social behaviours, which eventually culminates into monotheism.

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL22J3VaeABQAT-0aSPq-OKOpQlHyR4k5h[video]https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL22J3VaeABQAT-0aSPq-OKOpQlHyR4k5h[/video]
Click to expand...

Belief does interest me, thanks, I will check your Youtube link - however, I don't want to go into a deep philosophical discussion.

You made a statement that religion is "mostly harmless", I gave you examples that show otherwise. You then made a comment about whether the examples are sinful or not, which does not speak to the harm element.
 
vic777 said:
Belief does interest me, thanks, I will check your Youtube link - however, I don't want to go into a deep philosophical discussion.

You made a statement that religion is "mostly harmless", I gave you examples that show otherwise. You then made a comment about whether the examples are sinful or not, which does not speak to the harm element.
Click to expand...

It just depends on what you compare harm to doesn't it. Maybe it might be what I have been listening to recently but I recon that not being locked up in concentration camp or being sent to the gulag, or being starved to death because of a food shortage counts as being far less harmless than mostly fringe examples. You take the abortion shootings for example. For one thing, they are utterly condemned by pro-life groups. Secondly it is what 11 people, I would wager those people would be psychopaths anyway.

Religion isn't perfect by any means (although not being perfect compared to some utopia in people's head is also an interesting thing), and it needs a seriously good software update. But that doesn't mean that all your underlying frameworks are bad.
 
konfab said:
It just depends on what you compare harm to doesn't it. Maybe it might be what I have been listening to recently but I recon that not being locked up in concentration camp or being sent to the gulag, or being starved to death because of a food shortage counts as being far less harmless than mostly fringe examples. You take the abortion shootings for example. For one thing, they are utterly condemned by pro-life groups. Secondly it is what 11 people, I would wager those people would be psychopaths anyway.

Religion isn't perfect by any means (although not being perfect compared to some utopia in people's head is also an interesting thing), and it needs a seriously good software update. But that doesn't mean that all your underlying frameworks are bad.
Click to expand...

Ok, I'll bite.

Yes, it does depend. The concentration camps you mention - I take it you are referring to Hitler and WW2? Those would count as harm caused by religion, as Hitler was a christian.

In terms of non-belief what counts as a equivalent to the religious crime of blasphemy?

This guy wasn't sentenced to death for apostasy, he was sentenced to death for insulting an imaginary supernatural being. There is no equivalent of this in the world of non-belief.

You miss my point regarding the examples I made. Those are examples of people doing bad things *because* they have religious beliefs - they believe that their actions are justified because of their religious beliefs.
 
vic777 said:
Yes, it does depend. The concentration camps you mention - I take it you are referring to Hitler and WW2? Those would count as harm caused by religion, as Hitler was a christian
Click to expand...
You sure about that?
In light of evidence such as his rejection of the tenets of Christianity as an adolescent,[1] and his strenuous efforts to reduce the influence and independence of Christianity in Germany after he came to power, Hitler's major academic biographers conclude that he was an opponent of Christianity. Historian Laurence Rees found no evidence that "Hitler, in his personal life, ever expressed belief in the basic tenets of the Christian church".[2] Hitler's remarks to confidants, as described in the Goebbels Diaries, the memoirs of Albert Speer, and transcripts of Hitler's private conversations recorded by Martin Bormann in Hitler's Table Talk, are further evidence of his anti-Christian beliefs; these sources record a number of private remarks in which Hitler ridicules Christian doctrine as absurd and socially destructive.[3]
Click to expand...

Hitler said he anticipated a coming collapse of Christianity in the wake of scientific advances, and that Nazism and religion could not co-exist long term.[21] Although he was prepared to delay conflicts for political reasons, historians conclude that he ultimately intended the destruction of Christianity in Germany, or at least its distortion or subjugation to a Nazi outlook
Click to expand...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_of_Adolf_Hitler
He was a "Christian" because he wanted to make himself appeal to the politics at the time (think most US politicians. I doubt whether Obama, Hillary or Trump are actual practicing Christians ).

Again, I need to state, religion isn't perfect. Islam in particular has major demons they need to sort out in terms of the expansion of the state into people's lives, freedom of religion and freedom of speech. However it means a lot to lot of people, and probably is the core of their lives. It takes a certain type of arrogance to assume that what you wanted to do would only have positive consequences. 100 million people died in the Soviet Union, China, Vietnam and so on because they had the same type of thoughts as you did..
 
konfab said:
Religion isn't perfect by any means (although not being perfect compared to some utopia in people's head is also an interesting thing), and it needs a seriously good software update. But that doesn't mean that all your underlying frameworks are bad.
Click to expand...

But that is exactly what religion is; "a thing in people's heads".
 
Really at my wits end with this religion these days. When terror attacks happen, the standard rhetoric is, 'Its the extremists. They don't represent Islam. It's not us'. What about this sh*t then? This is just as barbaric and extreme. /rant off
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X