Two in three Australians think religion does more harm than good in the world - Sensationalist Headlines

[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;52788927]And religion does not affect actions?[/QUOTE] Christians don't ever drink?

It's common sense, really. Two hands in action does 100% more than two hands in prayer after all.

[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;52789089]I'm not applying a blanket statement to every single religious person, don't be defensive. I'm speaking on what i believe the religion teaches. The religion teaches "negative" logic skills. Anti-logic, I don't know a word for it. Don't question, think, or challenge. I also believe religion teaches to rely on it for an emotional crutch, which makes it even harder to want to question or think differently. No one wants to question their foundation for emotional support.[/QUOTE] I'm sorry, but this is actually just nonsense. Do you think human life has value that all people out to recognize? (I sure hope so) If so, then congratulations, you have an emotion based belief that is "anti-rational" (You cannot create a purely rational argument for human worth. It must have emotional foundations.)

[QUOTE=sgman91;52789294]Do you think human life has value that all people out to recognize? (I sure hope so) If so, then congratulations, you have an emotion based belief that is "anti-rational" (You cannot create a purely rational argument for human worth. It must have emotional foundations.)[/QUOTE] I don't get why people insist on talking about rationality and emotions as if they were opposed notions. If survival and well-being are to be considered key axioms of morality, then it follows that we have to consider humans have worth since we're an animal that needs the group to survive. Our emotions exist for our survival, they have a rational basis.

[QUOTE=_Axel;52789327]I don't get why people insist on talking about rationality and emotions as if they were opposed notions. If survival and well-being are to be considered key axioms of morality, then it follows that we have to consider humans have worth since we're an animal that needs the group to survive. Our emotions exist for our survival, they have a rational basis.[/QUOTE] My point is that the idea that any worldview or ideology that isn't purely rational or logical is bad is stupid as all hell. Every worldview has "anti-logic" views. Every worldview MUST hold fundamental axiomatic beliefs that can't be proven logically or rationally.

[QUOTE=sgman91;52789359]My point is that the idea that any worldview or ideology that isn't purely rational or logical is bad is stupid as all hell. Every worldview has "anti-logic" views. Every worldview MUST hold fundamental axiomatic beliefs that can't be proven logically or rationally.[/QUOTE] Sure. You should be able to defend those axiomatic beliefs in some capacity, though. Even if they're not entirely based on reason it at least plays a significant part.

[QUOTE=space1;52788164]They don't have religion in north korea, and in China if you don't follow the "official" branch of one the religions run by the state you disappear. So you're actually wrong, since having no religion makes you just as likely to be brainwashed by some dictator or your own parents.[/QUOTE] I don't know about China, but North Korea is a bad example for your argument, because the entire country is run as a religious cult. [QUOTE=Wikipedia]it is alleged that Kim Jong-il was born on Mount Paektu at his father's secret base in 1942 (his actual birth was in 1941 in the Soviet Union) and that his birth was heralded by a swallow, caused winter to change to spring, a star to illuminate the sky, and a double rainbow spontaneously appeared.[/QUOTE] If the story was instead that Kim Jong-Il (or any other leader of NK) was as fallible as any other human being, would the people be as easily controllable?

I see nothing wrong with that. [editline]18th October 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;52780830]Not really negative but it is a naive outlook to have. The absence of religion won't make humans any less hateful or violent. We wouldn't fight over which god is right, we'd just fight over something more tangible like resources, country, ethnicity, ect. There would still be war and genocide if religion never existed.[/QUOTE] Adding to that religion actually united Europe during Medieval times. It created kind of connection between nations of Europe. Accepting Christianity at that time was to help the nation evolve in every aspect of life. Was was Lithuania before Christianity, what was Hungary before it? They existed, yes, but labeled as barbarians. They had no support outside, they were also inferior in nearly every way. Accepting Christianity helped "unifying" Europe. It also taught the people ethical and moral ways of living. Christianity gave us so much in the past. It was mandatory for European nations in Early Medieval. Today, religion is completely unneeded.

[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;52789503]I don't know about China, but North Korea is a bad example for your argument, because the entire country is run as a religious cult. If the story was instead that Kim Jong-Il (or any other leader of NK) was as fallible as any other human being, would the people be as easily controllable?[/QUOTE] he is also incorrect about china don't worry lol