10 Commandments in Alabama?

[medievald00d]

(Causality is only an excuse when dealing with things that are free from it)
(I think I've heard 6000 years before)

I believe the whole point of pheonix's question was religion as a whole and their effects on society as a whole, with a focus on Judeo-christian religions.

Historicly, it is possible to to look at the effects of a religion on a culture, but it is not possible to look at what it does to people's daily lives.

Considering all the violence and hatred that is generated from people who demand that everyone accept thier "truth," and everything that uses religion as its justification, I'd say that religion does do a great deal of harm. I do not, however, feel I know enough to say weather or not the effect of religion is overall detrimental.

Dark ages, buddy. Anything even slightly science was outlawed as magic, and thus heresy to christianity, meaning a burning at the steak. Wars such as WWII and the cold war were not religious, and our technology increased tenfold, sending our men to the moon, and creating the atomic bomb.

Religious wars however...did what? Kill random people, women and children, rape, pillage, all in the name of god. The dark ages was a christian dominated era, and during those times, the worst of human history occured. The plague swept across europe during the dark ages, the only spike in the human population. take a look at a human population graph, theres a huge dip when the plague swept.

 

[Majin_Tenshi]

edit:
Oh, btw, majin, i actually had some questions for you concerning mutations:
1.) How common are mutations?
2.) Are they more common in different species?
3.) Are mutations always passed on to offspring?

1.) Mutations happen practicly everytime cells divide, its more of a case of "are they in 'data' segments of the DNA?" That is harder to say.

2.) Depends how you look at it. Small changes in DNA are more significant in things with less DNA.
- - There are some single-celled life forms that take in the DNA of other Single-cells they eat.

3.) Mutations in sex cells are passed on to the offspring.

 

[himura_kenshin]

Thanks for the info majin.
Phoenix, it almost sounds like your saying that a war that furthers technology is a good one. So world war II was good because it got us the atom bomb? um... i think we could have done without both wwII and the bomb, personally. In any case, there have been plenty of advances in technology that aren't because of war. Oh and how about WWI, got started over the assassination of the heir to a throne of a small country. Tons of people were massacred because they tried using outdated war tactics and new weaponry. Cavalry and machine guns don't mix. Korea and Vietnam weren't because of religion. Even the war on iraq, though it could be blamed on religion, most people say it's either for oil or safety. religion has plenty of negative affects, but it's not the "ultimate evil" you're portraying it as. Greed or lust for power or something fits that role better.

The dark ages was a christian dominated era, and during those times, the worst of human history occured. The plague swept across europe during the dark ages, the only spike in the human population. take a look at a human population graph, theres a huge dip when the plague swept.

Wait a sec, i just caught this. I certainly hope you're not blaming the plague on christian domination.

 

[Majin_Tenshi]

Wait a sec, i just caught this. I certainly hope you're not blaming the plague on christian domination.

Cats were seen as evil and therefore the cause of the plague and killed. Cats eat rats, the true spreader of the disease.

Now, I can't be sure that christianity caused cats to be seen as evil, however, cats (especialy black ones) are associated with witches.

 

[medievald00d]

Thanks for the info majin.
Phoenix, it almost sounds like your saying that a war that furthers technology is a good one. So world war II was good because it got us the atom bomb? um... i think we could have done without both wwII and the bomb, personally. In any case, there have been plenty of advances in technology that aren't because of war. Oh and how about WWI, got started over the assassination of the heir to a throne of a small country. Tons of people were massacred because they tried using outdated war tactics and new weaponry. Cavalry and machine guns don't mix. Korea and Vietnam weren't because of religion. Even the war on iraq, though it could be blamed on religion, most people say it's either for oil or safety. religion has plenty of negative affects, but it's not the "ultimate evil" you're portraying it as. Greed or lust for power or something fits that role better.

Wait a sec, i just caught this. I certainly hope you're not blaming the plague on christian domination.

Oh no, you seem to misunderstand me. What I am saying is that Non-religious wars actually taught us something, advanced political stability, or forged new alliances . In other words, a war that furthers technology is MUCH better than a war that doesnt. A war should always have some good outcome to it. Religious wars took the same toll on life (crusades, Middle east instability), but nothing came out of it. Without the Cold war, we wouldnt be in space today. Without WWII, our flying capabilities would be really weak. Granted WWI was an exception: a massive toll on life with no good outcomes whatsoever.

Vietnam War and Gulf War I&2 arent what I would call war. Congress didnt officially declare war, therefore it was not technically war. The Vietnam war taught our country that the president had too much power over the military, and that was scaled down.

As for blaming the plague on christian domination, I just meant that Christian Domination made it worst. It always does...You see, it went from Asia to Italy, and from Italy, Church power began to destabilize as people stopped believing in the church. To keep this from happening everywhere, flaggelants traveled northward to dispel the fear from the clergy. Well guess what? They spread the plague to northern Europe, killing more people. Good for them.

To make things worst, the flaggelants blamed the plague on the Jews. Guess what? It started a massacre of Jews. Well, then after a while, the Pope figured that people should stop burning Jews at the stake. So he requested that the people leave the Jews alone. Well, by then, everyone no longer believed in the church, and the killing of Jews continued.

So no, christianity wasnt the cause of the plague, but certainly helped make it worst.



As for greed or lust for power, The Christian Church fits that perfectly. Ah yes, and the war on Iraq wasnt really based on religion, but it had religious tones. Bush is a hardcore christian, and he's restarting the crusades....But yes, you are right, some of it is for oil, and some of it is because Bush is a moron. I wont blame religion on that one.

 

[Herald of Galactor]

Yes, such a problem can occur when a small group of people gain something like absolute power; however, that is a basic problem with humanity. Christianity often refers to people as 'sheep', humanity in general as 'the flock'. These comparisons are frighteningly accurate. People prefer not to think, they wait for someone to come and lead them, and they usually don't ask alot of questions about where they're being led. When a person yells 'fire!' in a crowded building, often the first instinct is not to act rationally and remain calm, but rather to stampede with the rest of the herd. Does religion take advantage of this weakness in human nature? Of course it does. But so do politicians, global corporations, and the news and advertising agencies. So are you a blind white sheep, or a sinning black sheep? Baa baa. :)

 

[medievald00d]

I believe Galactor is right, however, anything that exploits human nature to the point where one is ready to give his/her life is wrong. When people sued McDonalds for making them fat, no one strapped a bomb to their chest and killed themselves.

 

[himura_kenshin]

Does religion take advantage of this weakness in human nature? Of course it does. But so do politicians, global corporations, and the news and advertising agencies. So are you a blind white sheep, or a sinning black sheep? Baa baa.

True, but not all religions do. And not all members of a religion are just following other members. I can debate with a Christian just as long as i have debated with you guys on matters where we don't agree. I don't really consider myself to be following a flock.

I believe Galactor is right, however, anything that exploits human nature to the point where one is ready to give his/her life is wrong.

Err.. i guess i'll agree to that if it's exploiting. But i don't have problem with people being ready to give their life for some beliefs/causes, etc.

Oh btw, i don't agree with charlamagnes approach of "convert or die", but i have heard it said that if it weren't for him, the dark ages could've lasted a lot longer. I don't really believe in ends justifying means. Just an example where a religious fight had a good outcome.

 

[Herald of Galactor]

Actually, there were a few good outcomes of the Crusades:spice was introduced to the Europeans. This would lead to world exploration and international trade in the coming centuries. Otherwise, I must agree, the First Crusade was ordered by the Pope, carried out largely by Christians, and was little more than an excuse for the violent expression of people's anti-semitism. It did not accomplish much good, either.The Third Crusade was primarily a war to secure Middle and Near Eastern holdings for the English, French, and Germans(though, technicallly, at that time, Germany didn't even exist.).

The burning and hanging of heretics is another point of contention with me, as the accused were generally given over to secular authorities for punishment and execution(the church conveniently kept their own hands clean.)and the nobility were rarely willing to pursue the death of heretics unless the heretics had lots of land and money. Basically, it was the conspiracy of church and state that led to many of the excessive abuses of power in midieval times. This is also why the U.S. Constitution calls for seperation of church and state, which is why the judge does not have any more right to display the Ten Commandments in a public courthouse in the U.S. than he does to post tracts from the Koran or Buddhist teachings. Granted, 'Don't Kill' and 'Don't Steal' are stated alot more simply than current federal and state laws, the religious overtones of the first two Commandments is, imo, out of place in a secular court.

No, I have no intention of joining the evolution debate. I don't have any sources handy to cite in support of my opinions on that matter. :-X

 

[medievald00d]

Err.. i guess i'll agree to that if it's exploiting. But i don't have problem with people being ready to give their life for some beliefs/causes, etc.

Sorry, i misstated myself. I meant, I have aproblem being ready to take a life for their beliefs or causes. I wont shit myself if some cult member kills himself for the "mothership"

The burning and hanging of heretics is another point of contention with me, as the accused were generally given over to secular authorities for punishment and execution(the church conveniently kept their own hands clean.)and the nobility were rarely willing to pursue the death of heretics unless the heretics had lots of land and money. Basically, it was the conspiracy of church and state that led to many of the excessive abuses of power in midieval times. This is also why the U.S. Constitution calls for seperation of church and state, which is why the judge does not have any more right to display the Ten Commandments in a public courthouse in the U.S. than he does to post tracts from the Koran or Buddhist teachings. Granted, 'Don't Kill' and 'Don't Steal' are stated alot more simply than current federal and state laws, the religious overtones of the first two Commandments is, imo, out of place in a secular court.

Wow, back on topic. I always thought that all heretics were burned at the stake, but i suppose I'm wrong on that. As for everything else, I completely agree. Also note that if it were any other relgion's preaching that was displayed, there would be an immediate outcry from the entire country...

 

[Herald of Galactor]

Also note that if it were any other relgion's preaching that was displayed, there would be an immediate outcry from the entire country...

You're probably correct, but I'd still want to test that theory out . After all, the reason this has become such a matter of controversy is that the Associated Press played it up. If it had been ignored by all of the major news agencies, we likely wouldn't be discussing it now.

 

[himura_kenshin]

Also note that if it were any other relgion's preaching that was displayed, there would be an immediate outcry from the entire country...

You're probably correct, but I'd still want to test that theory out . After all, the reason this has become such a matter of controversy is that the Associated Press played it up. If it had been ignored by all of the major news agencies, we likely wouldn't be discussing it now.

Good point. Any other religion would probably raise more controversy, but this did raise some. And the guy did get ordered to take it down, right? So you can't really criticize this as a failure of separation of church and state. You can criticize it as a failure of citizens to acknowledge separation of church and state.

 

[MangyKid Ver.4.3]

wow, this thread is still going. It goes to show it's human nature to argue into the ground a bunch of things that are ultimately unimportant, unless it's your job to argue, that is. Sometimes I wonder if everyone can see the larger picture, but sometimes I lose sight of it too. Meaning of life? hapiness.

 

[himura_kenshin]

YESH i agree. No matter what anyone claims to strive for, for themselves, for other people, religious or not, the ultimate goal of every person is happiness. I personally enjoy debating, i do it for recreation.

 

[medievald00d]

ditto, it sucks to do something you dont like