Sip Posted July 13, 2002 Report Share Posted July 13, 2002 I was stuck in traffic today in 107 degree (F not C ) weather so of course I started wondering randomly again ... Is "freedom of religion" trully possible in a civilized society? Note: I would have put this thread under "religion" but I think it fits "life" much better One of the big things here we have in the US is this supposed "freedom of religion" thing. Yes, I like the US a lot, but I just don't think it is possible to have true freedom of religion. Why not? Well, any civilized society must have laws. Suppose we have a clause P in the law. Then, by definition of law, you can't have clause NOT P in your religion since it would be against the law. Thus, you don't have freedom of religion. Do you think I am oversimplifying things here? I tend to do that once in a while Was I maybe affected by the soaring heat? How can a society even pretend to have true "freedom of religion" if it is so obviously impossible to achieve? _ [ July 12, 2002, 08:43 PM: Message edited by: Sip ] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azat Posted July 13, 2002 Report Share Posted July 13, 2002 Sip, I think freedom of religion simply means you can practice whatever religion you wish as long as it is legal. It does not mean you can practice a religion that allows sacrefice of humans or anything like so. Say out of the sun or wear a cap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted July 19, 2002 Author Report Share Posted July 19, 2002 The other day, a friend of mine told me a really cool thing about this that I found very "deep" !!! He said: "A trully civilized society, would not need religion." After thinking about it for a while, I realized he's probably right. So that throws out the entire question. But before we become trully civilized, I think I agree with you Azat ... 'freedom' but under the restriction of the 'law'. Which is probably no different that any other place in the world, except that maybe the laws are less strict here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Accelerated Posted July 19, 2002 Report Share Posted July 19, 2002 Why was the Davidian Sect so brutally suppressed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted July 19, 2002 Author Report Share Posted July 19, 2002 ... because they were doing "illegal" things Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Accelerated Posted July 19, 2002 Report Share Posted July 19, 2002 Did these 'illigal' things (which btw I am not aware of, I know little of the incident) justify the massacre of over 100 (?) people including women and children? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted July 20, 2002 Author Report Share Posted July 20, 2002 Probably not. But what do you expect to happen when you set your own building on fire and close off all the doors and exits? At times like this, I see the laws of "natural selection" really working out!!! I don't know if you know about these other set of morons that commited mass suicide to get on this commet that came close to earth a few years ago (was it the Hale Bob or something?) ... I think several of them had already castrated themselves for whatever reason. I hope they are having fun on the comet. (hope they all didn't soffocate due to lack of air ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Accelerated Posted July 20, 2002 Report Share Posted July 20, 2002 If the incident was as intended by the sect, a mass suicide, why did the Oklahoma City bombing take place? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted July 20, 2002 Author Report Share Posted July 20, 2002 Because the suicide, unfortunately, did not take out all the dumb asses in the world It only took out those who were in the compound. Note: the "childeren" who happened to be caught up in this whole ugly incident are excpetions to my comments above. They would have probably grown up to become dumb asses, but at the time, they were nothing but stupid childeren. Note also that I think all childeren are stupid!!! At some point, a select few develop abilities to think on their own ... but the majority, it seems, remain stupid as they grow old. By the way, hope you are not getting the impression that I am "defending" the US government's actions in that incident ... NO. I am NOT. However, I don't think those branch Davidian's were particularly "bright" so to say. There are SO many ways to live fruitful, successful lives (yes, even with as many women as that David Koresh guy wanted to have) without ending up like BBQ in some desolate compound in the middle of no where Just sad ... very sad. [ July 19, 2002, 10:32 PM: Message edited by: Sip ] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Accelerated Posted July 20, 2002 Report Share Posted July 20, 2002 I think you misunderstood me. My question was, if the sect was successful in commiting mass suicide, why was this particular member of the sect seeking revenge? I mean his fellow members got what they wanted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted July 20, 2002 Author Report Share Posted July 20, 2002 Oh I see ... No they did NOT want the suicide. But given the options, they selected suicide as the better alternative. This is why I do NOT defend the US governments actions since they are the ones who ultimately presented the Davidians with the "options" (surrender or die). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azat Posted July 20, 2002 Report Share Posted July 20, 2002 quote:Originally posted by Accelerated:I think you misunderstood me. My question was, if the sect was successful in commiting mass suicide, why was this particular member of the sect seeking revenge? I mean his fellow members got what they wanted.Juggernaut, sorry I may be misunderstanding you as well. But I think they decided to commit suicide as led by their leader as a better option then to see their leader get arrested for the crimes that he was going to be charged for. Members who survived felt that US government killed them(partially they were right as FBI reports have shown now) and those surviving members felt that they needed to take revenge. Discovery Channel with PBS about a year ago had an excellent show on the whole incident and the mistakes that the ATF and FBI made during the whole incident. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Accelerated Posted July 20, 2002 Report Share Posted July 20, 2002 Oh ok, thats clear now... I saw bits and pieces of that documentary (I think), but I cant remeber anything from it except a few images... Do you know what 'illigal' activities they were conducting? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azat Posted July 20, 2002 Report Share Posted July 20, 2002 I think, I do not remember clearly, but the charges(nothing proven) were sex with minors and polygamy. Maybe someone who knows better can correct me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted July 20, 2002 Author Report Share Posted July 20, 2002 I think the official reason for the raid was to serve warrants for illegal posession of firearms and explosives. In addition, this is what the PBS site says: "Koresh acknowledged on a videotape sent out of the compound during the standoff that he had fathered more than 12 children by several "wives" who were as young as 12 or 13 when they became pregnant." On top of that, I think they were beating the kids and "abusing" them which is a BIG no no in the US. Here's the PBS site. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sen_Vahan Posted July 20, 2002 Report Share Posted July 20, 2002 "I was stuck in traffic today in 107 degree (F not C ) weather so of course I started wondering randomly again ... Is "freedom of religion" trully possible in a civilized society? " Sip jan, why did you start to think about such terrible things in a traffic?... Didn't you have some water there?... by the way, i do not understand why a civilized society should not have a religion? I am lost.. It sounds brave but why do you think so? What is then a civilized society? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted July 20, 2002 Author Report Share Posted July 20, 2002 quote:Originally posted by sen_vahan:"I was stuck in traffic today in 107 degree (F not C ) weather so of course I started wondering randomly again ... Is "freedom of religion" trully possible in a civilized society? " Sip jan, why did you start to think about such terrible things in a traffic?... Didn't you have some water there?... I am seriously thinking of making a big hat for myself with a BIG heat sink and a cooling fan on it! I keep my computer CPU cooler than my head sometimes!!!!! It's a wonder I don't crash or just get "stuck" somewhere. Gotta love whoever designed our brain quote:by the way, i do not understand why a civilized society should not have a religion? I am lost.. It sounds brave but why do you think so? What is then a civilized society?Ok, I am NOT certain on my position on this as my views change day by day. At the moment, I am thinking that religeon was set in place to establish guidlines, morals, and a "way of life" for those who were not able to think clearly on their own. Things like "you shouldn't steal", "you shouldn't kill" etc etc had to be enforced using the "fear of hell" factor (example from christianity), as opposed to logical and ethical reasons of why one should live that way. A "civilized" society, in my dictionary, implies that it's individual members are capable of rational thought and clear thinking. There must of course be laws to establish a "standard" baseline of what is accepted by the masses but no religeon would be required anymore to strictly define what each individual should and should not do. Now on the spiritual side of things I am fairly convinced on my standpoint. A trully enlightened person does not need spirituality to feel good about life and have a purpose. Thus, I find that aspect of religeon, useless in a "trully" civilized society. And I fully realize this is a completely unpopular stance but all I have is myself to model my view of reality on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Accelerated Posted July 22, 2002 Report Share Posted July 22, 2002 Thanks for the info guys, certainly puts things into perspective. quote:as opposed to logical and ethical reasons of why one should live that way.Where do you think we got these ethical and 'logical' reasons? Thats correct, Christianity. Remeber that everything is relative when it comes to these reasons, had it not been for religion our society would be very different. quote:implies that it's individual members are capable of rational thought and clear thinking. Again, 'rational' is relative. 100 years ago it was rational to kill in revenge, now there is a justice system... quote:A trully enlightened person does not need spirituality to feel good about life and have a purpose. Enlightened of what? Of how the world 'functions'? I may not be a professor or a genius, but I am largelly aware of the history and current state of this world and the way it operates (from biology to the stock market) and I still have little doubt that there is a God. He may not be in the form as described in the Koran or the Bible, but not far and certainly far superior to our meagre existance. For one, how do you think the world and the universe came into existence? The Big Bang I believe is a load of rubbish... Another point I wanted to make was, just because events can be scientifically explained does not mean that they are not the 'work of God'.eg. During artificial insemination the sperm is inserted into the egg, then a jolt of energy is passed through the egg to start the process. Where do you think this jolt of energy comes from in a womens overial tube (I think thats what its called the tube that links an overy to the uterus)? [ July 21, 2002, 10:14 PM: Message edited by: Accelerated ] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted July 22, 2002 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2002 quote:Originally posted by Accelerated:... He [GOD] may not be in the form as described in the Koran or the Bible, but not far and certainly far superior to our meagre existance. For one, how do you think the world and the universe came into existence? The Big Bang I believe is a load of rubbish...I don't believe in GOD. But then, I am 'enlightened' enough to acknowledge the possibility of it's existance. I am not certain about Big Bang or any other theories about the origin of the Universe (I don't think there is a single human being that can be certain of it). However, I don't usually dismiss things as rubbish without sufficient evidence. That's what I think is the definition of "enlightened" ... basing beliefs on "reason" and empirical observations (not on hearsay, guesstimation, or imagination). Would our societies have been different without Christianity? Probably. Would we be in a complete state of disarray and kill and rape each other every day? Probably not. Ethics and morals do not have their roots in religeon. I think they have deep 'reasons' for their existence. We don't steal and kill each other since GOD said so! No, we don't steal and we don't kill each other because doing so, would completely undermine 'civil' and 'social' existence in an advanced race such as us humans. We had 'civilized' societies way before christianity ... and we will have them long after it's disappearance as well Yes, I am usually an optimist . [ July 21, 2002, 10:30 PM: Message edited by: Sip ] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Accelerated Posted July 22, 2002 Report Share Posted July 22, 2002 quote:Would we be in a complete state of disarray and kill and rape each other every day? Probably not.It was largelly thanks to the Church that the scientific works of the Ancient Greeks and Romans, and the very basic forms of education survived through the Dark and Middle Ages (approx. 500-1500AD). Also, many of the first 'thinkers' of the renaissance were religious monks (eg. Mendel). If it wasnt for the Church we would be many hundred years behind. quote:Ethics and morals do not have their roots in religeon.I think you are very WRONG in this statement. Ethics and morals have evolved, but their roots lie in Christianity (in the Western World anyway) quote: No, we don't steal and we don't kill each other because doing so, would completely undermine 'civil' and 'social' existence in an advanced race such as us humans.As recent as 1000 years ago there was little in the way of social and civil order in Europe, yet the ethics and morals of today are very similar to those times if not more 'looser'. quote:We had 'civilized' societies way before christianity Ancient Rome and Greece only have a facade of 'civilisation', deep down they were nothing more than large tribes (or city-states) bound by prospects of common material advancement. History glorifies them for the sake of European prestige. quote:and we will have them long after it's disappearance as well We have allready begun the slide into the Abyss... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted July 22, 2002 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2002 What happened to Egypt? I am no history buff but I thought they had a great civilization before Jesus showed up!!! The chinese seemed to do fine as well. What about the Inkas in South America? Didn't they have an advanced civilization with "modern"-type cities where they all got along fine? Are you telling me there were no morlas and ethics before God and Jesus showed up with the Bible about 2000 years ago? I agree that the Church has had a strong influence on the development of science in Europe in the past centuries. It makes sense ... they had the money and science aint cheap!!! But the likes of Aristotle, Plato, Pythagoras, etc etc didn't do too bad without Christianity either. Oh and should we turn this thread into the "immoral" things that the church has done? How many witches did they burn? How many scientists did they destroy ... those who dared to say the Earth was round ... those who dared to say we revolved around the Sun? Those who dared to say evolution can and does happen? The "church" may have helped science a lot but I am SURE it did more BAD than GOOD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Accelerated Posted July 22, 2002 Report Share Posted July 22, 2002 quote:What happened to Egypt? Yes, Egypt was relativelly advanced (for its age), but they also had an influential religion quote:What about the Inkas in South America? As did the Incas. Seaphan I am arguing for religions in general as a moral force. I was simply using Europe and Christianity as an example. Needless to say, neither Egypt, nor the Incas or the Chinese were able to dominate the world like Christian Europe quote:Are you telling me there were no morlas and ethics before God and Jesus showed up with the Bible about 2000 years ago?No, of course not. What I am saying is that our current morals and ethics are derived from Christianity (which to a limited extent has its roots in Judaism). quote:How many witches did they burn? I am not saying the Catholic Church is infalable. But you should look in your own backyard (America) when you want to see immoral things done. The so called pinacle of civilisation is nothing more than a tyrannical regime bent on World domination (and its willing to sacrifice YOU, American citizens to achieve its ends eg. Pearl Harbour, Spanish War, Sept 11). quote:How many scientists did they destroy ... those who dared to say the Earth was round ... those who dared to say we revolved around the Sun? Those who dared to say evolution can and does happen?Trust me, not as many as the American media would make you think quote:The "church" may have helped science a lot but I am SURE it did more BAD than GOODWell you are simply wrong. It didnt help science advance in certain areas, but it was instrumental in its survival for 1000 years! [ July 22, 2002, 03:49 AM: Message edited by: Accelerated ] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted July 22, 2002 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2002 Ok let's get back to the main argument. You are saying 'religeon in general as a moral force'. I am saying 'reason and logic in general as a moral force'. In the past, YOU PROBABLY VERY RIGHT. In a trully civilized society, I say you wrong. No need for religeon. Rational thought and reason is enough force. Sorry if I seem to be dropping words in my sentences but I haven't slept in 36 hours ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Accelerated Posted July 22, 2002 Report Share Posted July 22, 2002 quote:Sorry if I seem to be dropping words in my sentences but I haven't slept in 36 hours ... Yes, I see its 4am there. . What are you doing up so late? quote:In a trully civilized society, I say you wrong. No need for religeon. Rational thought and reason is enough force.I say rational thought and reason are both relative and evolving. The 'standard' of our rational thought and reason however was DICTATED by Christianity and has been changing since. Now this part is hard to put into words, but I hope you understand what I mean. People on average have become more informed on the world around them, but it hasnt made us 'smarter' on deliberating on moral and ethical issues, hence we must look to religion to lead the way in such decisions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Accelerated Posted July 22, 2002 Report Share Posted July 22, 2002 Sip, I suggest you get some sleep, or am I that interesting 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.