Liberal view of Government.

[Diogenes]

Careful. The secular humanist Communists killed 100 million people in the 20th, all in the name of a just and caring society.

You are making my point.

Please gentlemen, just because a polywog claims to be a fish, doesn't make it so.

A polywog claiming to be a fish is no big deal. It is the fish which claims to be a polywog that is far more dangerous.

The proponents of Anti-Theism would have us believe that they are harmless. The Record says they are far worse than the worst theists.

[Skipjack]

Given the track record of the Theists vs. the Anti-theists, i'd much rather have the Theists.

Communism is still a religion. Dont you get that?
It is an ideology. Ideology= religion = eternal truths and dogmas = unscientific.
The usual (to avoid saying real) humanists have a problem with all religions, not just with those that involve a god. Communism may have claimed to be humanism, but is not, since it is a religion.

[Diogenes]

Meaning very angry, as In the American context, not very drunk, as in the English one

I think the latter is much funnier though
In Austria "pissen" is a slang word and means "to pee", btw

American english is full of colloquialisms. Who knows what the etymology of the slang word "P|ssed" is. "P|ssed" in American English means the past tense of "P|ss", which means as you said, "to pee." But it's funny either way.

In any case, I think the consensus among the Christians is that Christ didn't use violence as a means to win converts, and his actions speak louder than his out of context words.

That is all great and dandy, but it is not what happened. I am sure that there are lots of religions and ideologies that started with simillar noble ideas, but that resulted in lots of killing, crying, nasty scenes...

Jesus preached to "show the other cheek", but instead even the "christian" US went to war for retatliation, EVERY TIME it got attacked.
Sure that is fine with me, if you get attacked, you should be allowed to defend yourself, but it is not christian (well not according to my interpreteation and seemingly not according to Diogenes' either).

There is no dispute from me that the typical American Male reaction to insults and injury is not to "turn the other cheek." It is to turn the other guy into a casualty.

Christians often want to rationalize this behavior as somehow being condoned by the Bible, but you really can't without fooling yourself.

I have noticed that people have no problems living their whole lives with all sorts of fallacious and hypocritical behavior. It is like the fellow I mentioned many posts ago, that had been hypnotized to forget the number "7". The idea that something might be wrong simply doesn't occur to him.

In any case, and in this very particular case, it is a good thing that people have no problem with this cognitive dissonance. The methods of Christianity seem to work long term, but not short term. Any nation that adopted them consistently would cease to exist short term. It would be swallowed up by the very first nation that realized these people wouldn't fight back.

[Skipjack]

But see, if we dare to say that we can disregard religion when it is convenient for the religious, wouldnt it be better to disregard it all together. I mean that would be equally convenient for the non religious.
In regards to secularism:
Imagine the muslims becoming a majority one day. Wouldnt you be grateful to have secularism?

There are certain religions in the US (elsewhere called cults) such as scientology that are purposely trying to get into the government and to make laws etc to their benefit.
I would sure hope that secularism will somewhat prevent them from doing that.

[Diogenes]

Given the track record of the Theists vs. the Anti-theists, i'd much rather have the Theists.

Communism is still a religion. Dont you get that?
It is an ideology. Ideology= religion = eternal truths and dogmas = unscientific.
The usual (to avoid saying real) humanists have a problem with all religions, not just with those that involve a god. Communism may have claimed to be humanism, but is not, since it is a religion.

I have repeatedly said that Communism/Socialism is a religion. It is the belief in the benefit of something which is taken on faith, and in my mind is based on a dangerous fallacy.

I distinctly pointed out though, that it was anti-theistic. It does away with supernatural gods, and instead faithfully relies on the idea that it can create supernatural humans.

The genius of a deist based religion is it relies on a made up deity that will punish you for being bad, and leaves it up to each individual to decide what THEY think being bad means, and to act accordingly. It makes each individual look at their actions through the perspective of a third party figure evaluating them for "badness." As often as not, many prefer to play on the safe side, and modify their natural human behavior accordingly. (It's like an artificial guide star, if you're familiar with this aspect of astronomy.)

It uses fakery and emotion to make better people, while Socialism attempts to use reason and logic to make better people. Needless to say, humans don't respond well to reason and logic, but they respond quite decently to fakery and emotion.

Something I learned years ago. Empathy and emotion beats facts and reason any day of the week. Even here, among all of us "Oh so logical" people, a good emotional argument will win every time.

[Diogenes]

But see, if we dare to say that we can disregard religion when it is convenient for the religious, wouldnt it be better to disregard it all together. I mean that would be equally convenient for the non religious.
In regards to secularism:
Imagine the muslims becoming a majority one day. Wouldnt you be grateful to have secularism?

I would not make the foolish mistake of believing they would tolerate it.

Deistic religions are instinctive in the human race. The belief that they can easily be dispensed with is very much like the Socialist fallacy that greed can be dispensed with.

You cannot argue with emotions. Many is the example of a man (or woman) arguing with a prospective mate telling them 'You ought to pick me because I can do this, or that, or this other thing." Love is not subject to intellectual reasoning, it is far more primal.

[Skipjack]

while Socialism attempts to use reason and logic to make better people.

The mistake in your theory is the "better people" part. You can not "make" "better people".
People are people and their behaviour is to a large extent (yes I dont like that fact either) defined by their genes (people still argue about that, but there is more proof of this every day). Most religions are trying to create a better human by using one tactic or the other.
The problem with the socialism/communism that you cite is that they believed that either via revolution, anarchy, destruction, pain, teaching, etc (and the most moderate ones might have believed via reasoning) a new human would emerge. Of course this is wrong. Christian religion also tries this to some extent though. Again it is wrong. You can not educate a lion to be a lamb. You can try to tame the lion with a whip an little treats. But as soon as you turn you back, it might bite off your head.

[Skipjack]

Deistic religions are instinctive in the human race.

Hmm, I am not so sure about that. I think that a large part of the Europeans are only christian on paper anymore and are actually mostly atheists, or at least agnostic.
I personally dont like the word atheist, as it has a negative touch to it (plus communists are also referred to as atheists while in fact communism is a religion).

That said, there are a few basic items of christian morale that are pretty decent. It is however questionable whether one should lie to an entire people in order to communicate a few noteworthy items of morale to them.
In any case, I think that the US political correctness which goes IMHO to far with the way it disallows public critizism of religion plays into the hands of fundamentalists. Fundamentalists are of course always trying to release laws that prevent them from being ridiculed. Why? Because the easiest way to wipe floor with a religious fundamentalist is to show them their own ridiculousness.

[Diogenes]

while Socialism attempts to use reason and logic to make better people.

The mistake in your theory is the "better people" part. You can not "make" "better people".

By "better people", i'm referring to people who are better behaved and altruistic.

People are people and their behaviour is to a large extent (yes I dont like that fact either) defined by their genes (people still argue about that, but there is more proof of this every day). Most religions are trying to create a better human by using one tactic or the other.
The problem with the socialism/communism that you cite is that they believed that either via revolution, anarchy, destruction, pain, teaching, etc (and the most moderate ones might have believed via reasoning) a new human would emerge. Of course this is wrong. Christian religion also tries this to some extent though. Again it is wrong. You can not educate a lion to be a lamb. You can try to tame the lion with a whip an little treats. But as soon as you turn you back, it might bite off your head.

Theistic religions create better behaved people by using a characteristic of mankind (fear of retribution) against his baser nature. (desire to get an advantage over his fellows.)

It is no different than the Genius of the United States founders of separating the powers and pitting them against each other. Or in a simpler example, to have one child cut the cake and the other to pick which piece he wants. Rest assured, this methodology yields a reasonably fair result.

It is as in engineering, a negative feedback system.

[Diogenes]

Deistic religions are instinctive in the human race.

Hmm, I am not so sure about that. I think that a large part of the Europeans are only christian on paper anymore and are actually mostly atheists, or at least agnostic.
I personally dont like the word atheist, as it has a negative touch to it (plus communists are also referred to as atheists while in fact communism is a religion).

Theism is in the Firmware, and is reinforced by the software. Europe has been inundated for a very long time with Anti-theistic impulses, not the least of which is prosperity.

The word athiest actually means "A-theist" or "Anti-Theist", meaning someone who is against the belief in deities. Agnosticism is the belief that there is no deities, or at least that their existence is in doubt. Agnosticism is not evangelical. Atheism, on the other hand, appears to be very evangelical.

That said, there are a few basic items of christian morale that are pretty decent. It is however questionable whether one should lie to an entire people in order to communicate a few noteworthy items of morale to them.
In any case, I think that the US political correctness which goes IMHO to far with the way it disallows public critizism of religion plays into the hands of fundamentalists. Fundamentalists are of course always trying to release laws that prevent them from being ridiculed. Why? Because the easiest way to wipe floor with a religious fundamentalist is to show them their own ridiculousness.

Maybe from your perspective, but I learned a long time ago you can't win an argument from someone who refuses to accept your (or even common) premises. They will simply tell all of their people that THEY won the argument. And they will really believe it too!

[MSimon]

Theistic religions create better behaved people by using a characteristic of mankind (fear of retribution)

But religion is only good at instilling fear in the very poor. With all the wealth around that fear is not as useful as it once was.

You will have to find a different basis for the current conditions.

Something logical with proof. Or perhaps Buddhism. They manage to have a religion without reference to God. "What is the right way to live" is a better question than "what does God say".

[Skipjack]

Theistic religions create better behaved people by using a characteristic of mankind (fear of retribution) against his baser nature. (desire to get an advantage over his fellows.)

Again they dont. The mafiosi in Italy are all going to church every sunday and they are generous donors to the catholic church, yet they will kill an opponent without hesitation. Why? Because they can ask the lord for forgiveness next sunday. Forgiveness is granted and they will go to heaven anyway. I dont know, I dont quite see how that teaches them anything?

Theism is in the Firmware, and is reinforced by the software.

No theism is a virus, or maybe a trojan horse.

[Skipjack]

The mormons (a cult) are coming to Austria more and more recently, but they tried it here even when my father was still studying medicine. Now back then times were better and political correctness was not forced on us like it is today.
So there they were standing in their suits shouting arround all sorts of crap. There was a big pile of people standing arround them, interested in what this was all about. One of the mormons was asking "so do you believe that Jesus was an example of a force against drug abuse". Well my father is quite knowledgeful when it comes to the bible and said:
"You know, the wedding to Kanaan? First Jesus turned water into wine and then when he was drunk he offended his mother. >What shall I do with you woman?> he had shouted at her. Not the kind of behaviour I would expect from an "example of a force against drug abuse"."
Lots of loud laughter and the whole pile of people dissolved really quickly after that, leaving the mormons standing in the rain.
Of course nowadays the political correctness that has been forced on us by religious fundamentalists wants to prevent us from doing just such a thing. I dont see anything bad in what my father did. He showed the guy that his believes are crap and that he better go sell his crazy elsewhere.

[alexjrgreen]

"You know, the wedding to Kanaan? First Jesus turned water into wine and then when he was drunk he offended his mother. >What shall I do with you woman?> he had shouted at her.

Wasn't it the other way round?

[Diogenes]

Theistic religions create better behaved people by using a characteristic of mankind (fear of retribution)

But religion is only good at instilling fear in the very poor. With all the wealth around that fear is not as useful as it once was.

You will have to find a different basis for the current conditions.

Something logical with proof. Or perhaps Buddhism. They manage to have a religion without reference to God. "What is the right way to live" is a better question than "what does God say".

This is astute. You are correct. Religion isn't working anymore, but that's not to say it might not resume working once the conditions change to that which religion works best at. Desperation.

It would be nice if it didn't overreact should it become a dominant meme once again.