Teenager faces prosecution for calling Scientology 'cult'

[Montreal Wanderer]

Religion should be a source for good in this world and it can be a great comfort to those who have faith. It can also become dogma and misused by men for other evil purposes. Acts are committed in the name of religions which are clearly contrary to the tenets of those religions. People lose or gain faith for any number of reasons, but to attempt to convince them that what they believe at a particular moment is wrong is pointless. I am an atheist not because anything can be proved either way but because the concept of God, invented by men with less knowledge than I have, seems extremely improbable. However, one can still live one's life in an ethical way, based to a significant extent on religious texts.

totally agree with your sentiments there MW, which may indeed worry you! But I do take that further step and like my life to revolve around evidence and reason, logic and probability; superstition has no place for me ('cept maybe on matchdays ) and I don't think ethics has to have anthing to do with religion. Then there's the duplicitous nature of being religious, you want to live part of your life based on blind faith, but you wouldn't walk out in to the road with a blindfold on if a stranger told you it was safe. Why have faith in something completely intangible but the apply strict logic for another?

I would also take the highlighted point one step further in itself. In the bible, many are supposed to have spoken to God, Angels and all manner of spirit, the Bible states this as fact, unless it's one of those bits you arbitraily decide is just analagous, and no believer thinks anything unusual of these tales, all perfectly reasonable. Peter Sutclifffe claims God told him to kill women and he's a nutter. Now as far as I'm concerned any claim that you're hearing voices in your head makes you of questionable sanity, but for some reason a certain section of society has decided that it knows what God's will is and that he can't change his mind 2,000 + years later, inspite of his omnipotence.


I would also argue that trying to explain the ludicous nature of their beliefs to a relgious type is not pointless, the point is to get them to open their mind. Futile it may be in the case of those so heavily brainwashed that they metaphorically stick their fingers in their ears and go "ner ner ner I am not listening ner ner ner", but not pointless.



Oh and in reponse to our resident God-botherer, as I assumed he meant me, I can't be Anti-God, as he doesn't exist. You may as well refer to me as anti-tooth fairy

While ethics do not have to have anything to do with religion (agreed), I think that many religions have an ethical or moral basis as "rules" for living in a well-ordered society. The Christian ethic is not a bad one overall, whether or not one believes Jesus was the Son of God, although some parts may be outdated. I would not describe people as having ludicrous beliefs even though I personally consider such beliefs as infinitely high on the improbability scale. If it gives them comfort in a hard world, or whatever, it is no bad thing. I wouldn't try to argue them out of it. In our western society we believe in the equality of sexes, but I wouldn't trumpet this view in Saudi Arabia. Besides being dangerous, there is no point. Belief systems cannot by their nature be countered by rational or realistic argument, IMHO. Of course, when those beliefs are thrust upon me then I would tend to object. I find proselytizers quite annoying.

[Lord Kangana]

Proselytizer? Is that some new form of tongue-twisting soft drink?

[TANGODANCER]

i never understand how the idea of religion makes perfectly reasonable inteligent people who always work on facts, suddenly shut there eyes and put their fingers in their ears. thats not meant as a personal attack on you tango, this is the only time ive heard you talk about religion, and me thinks there may have been an element of controversy stiring!!

You talking to me?

[Dujon]

Ruddy 'eck, TANGO, I can think many things of you, old chap, but a sindonologist is not one of them.

[TANGODANCER]

Ruddy 'eck, TANGO, I can think many things of you, old chap, but a sindonologist is not one of them.

Well, I might be if I knew what one was?

[Montreal Wanderer]

Ruddy 'eck, TANGO, I can think many things of you, old chap, but a sindonologist is not one of them.

Well, I might be if I knew what one was?

Not a word often dropped into conversation. From sindon = body covering fabric, so someone who studies the Shroud of Turin. A fairly rare occupation especially in Australia.

[TANGODANCER]

Ruddy 'eck, TANGO, I can think many things of you, old chap, but a sindonologist is not one of them.

Well, I might be if I knew what one was?

Not a word often dropped into conversation. From sindon = body covering fabric, so someone who studies the Shroud of Turin. A fairly rare occupation especially in Australia.

In that case Monty (and Dujon) I suppose I am then. Read, studied and seen a lot about it and its history, although I confess I've never heard the word before. The topic has been well covered (pardon the bad pun) on TV over here, together with the Mandylion. Thanks for the info, it has a certain er, appeal to it (although I thought Dujon had spelled it wrong and meant a fan of Donald Sinden)

[superjohnmcginlay]

CPS shows some common sense shocker.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7416425.stm

[Bruce Rioja]

so someone who studies the Shroud of Turin.

I seem to recall them running some carbon date tests on it about ten years ago and they all dated it back only as far as about the 14th Century. Summat like that anyway.

[Prufrock]

so someone who studies the Shroud of Turin.

I seem to recall them running some carbon date tests on it about ten years ago and they all dated it back only as far as about the 14th Century. Summat like that anyway.

i remember that story too i think. although that aside there is proof Jesus exsisted, just not that he was the son of god

[Bruce Rioja]

although that aside there is proof Jesus exsisted, just not that he was the son of god

My understanding and belief exactly, good Sir.

[TANGODANCER]

so someone who studies the Shroud of Turin.

I seem to recall them running some carbon date tests on it about ten years ago and they all dated it back only as far as about the 14th Century. Summat like that anyway.

A little more controversy since then: Tests are currently underway on the Shroud because of some error in the dating process which may put a different spin on things. All I know, fromt he latest programme I saw, is that another small scrap has been allowed for tests. The results, as far as I know, haven't been published as yet. The finest brains and technology in the world, however, despite many years of research, still can't explain how the image got on the Shroud.

[Prufrock]

so someone who studies the Shroud of Turin.

I seem to recall them running some carbon date tests on it about ten years ago and they all dated it back only as far as about the 14th Century. Summat like that anyway.

A little more controversy since then: Tests are currently underway on the Shroud because of some error in the dating process which may put a different spin on things. All I know, fromt he latest programme I saw, is that another small scrap has been allowed for tests. The results, as far as I know, haven't been published as yet. The finest brains and technology in the world, however, despite many years of research, still can't explain how the image got on the Shroud.

i drew it

[TANGODANCER]

A debate on religion and second -in -command atheist Lennon hasn't appeared? Amazing, has he been converted?

[Bruce Rioja]

The finest brains and technology in the world, however, despite many years of research, still can't explain how the image got on the Shroud.

Indeed, and that's just the image in itself, let alone it supposedly being the image of Christ himself.

[TANGODANCER]

The finest brains and technology in the world, however, despite many years of research, still can't explain how the image got on the Shroud.

Indeed, and that's just the image in itself, let alone it supposedly being the image of Christ himself.

Quite amazingly, the Arabs had worked out the basic principles of the camera, by the fourteenth century, by using the sun to project an image through a small hole onto another surface. So much for Eastman Kodak and co.

[sluffy]

A debate on religion and second -in -command atheist Lennon hasn't appeared? Amazing, has he been converted?

As you are fully aware Lennon was banned for life for his disagreements with you.

I would have thought that such an advocate of Christianity that you would have asked for him to be forgiven of his 'sins' rather to make a cheap joke at his 'suffering'?

[CrazyHorse]

A debate on religion and second -in -command atheist Lennon hasn't appeared? Amazing, has he been converted?

As you are fully aware Lennon was banned for life for his disagreements with you.

I would have thought that such an advocate of Christianity that you would have asked for him to be forgiven of his 'sins' rather to make a cheap joke at his 'suffering'?

If only poeple were banned for not knowing when to shut the fook up and let sleeping dogs lie, eh sluffy?

[TANGODANCER]

A debate on religion and second -in -command atheist Lennon hasn't appeared? Amazing, has he been converted?

As you are fully aware Lennon was banned for life for his disagreements with you.

I would have thought that such an advocate of Christianity that you would have asked for him to be forgiven of his 'sins' rather to make a cheap joke at his 'suffering'?

Not being a mod at the time, no, I'm sure I wasn't aware of that- although I do admit my memory isn't quite what it was- and I actually exchanged pm's with him without malice. I would have no problem whatsoever in him being re-instated. If I do remember it wasn't so much my views, but the attacks they came under for defending them, that led to religion becoming a banned topic. Might have actually been useful if you yourself had pm'd me at the time with your views rather than waiting this long.

Ah well, there goes another religious-linked thread that couldn't be conducted without malice I suppose . You see it's always the non-believers that do all the attacking of beliefs, the believers don't really care what others do or even try to convince them they're wrong. People believe or not as they wish. As it should be. I stated I wouldn't get involved on that topic, and I haven't.......and still the nastiness creeps in.

[Prufrock]

A debate on religion and second -in -command atheist Lennon hasn't appeared? Amazing, has he been converted?

As you are fully aware Lennon was banned for life for his disagreements with you.

I would have thought that such an advocate of Christianity that you would have asked for him to be forgiven of his 'sins' rather to make a cheap joke at his 'suffering'?

Not being a mod at the time, no, I'm sure I wasn't aware of that- although I do admit my memory isn't quite what it was- and I actually exchanged pm's with him without malice. I would have no problem whatsoever in him being re-instated. If I do remember it wasn't so much my views, but the attacks they came under for defending them, that led to religion becoming a banned topic. Might have actually been useful if you yourself had pm'd me at the time with your views rather than waiting this long.

Ah well, there goes another religious-linked thread that couldn't be conducted without malice I suppose . You see it's always the non-believers that do all the attacking of beliefs, the believers don't really care what others do or even try to convince them they're wrong. People believe or not as they wish. As it should be. I stated I wouldn't get involved on that topic, and I haven't.......and still the nastiness creeps in.

have i missed something? i havent noticed anything on this thread malicious? disagreements yes, but nothing malicious or out of order, non? i was quite enjoying the debate or is that only me ?