Should Religion Be Banned?
Posted 11 October 2010 - 09:22 PM
On the other hand, is religion just another form of tribalism? Would we simply revert to something else to settle our differences, such as trade and land. However why HAVE NOT we settled to these before?
Please do not include religious beliefs in this debate, only opinion on the topic.
Posted 12 October 2010 - 11:50 PM
Have you heard John Lennon's Imagine?
I think your idea that religion is only tribalism is interesting, and it is true that in places like northern Ireland their religion was part of their tribal identity.
But in other times and places religion has transcended individual identities (e.g. the whole middle-eastern and eastern world went Muslim in the middle ages - across tribal, racial and many other social and cultural boundaries) ... so the tribalism thing doesn;t work.
Does it help to distinguish between 'religion' as a spiritual experience (which often leads to peace) and 'religion' as a set of dogma (which oftern leads to intolerance) and 'religion' as an organisation (which often leads to an organisation which is indsitinguishable to the 'world' in which it operates)?
The only other idea I would have off the top of my head is to say that it would be impossible to outlaw religion because it is an essential part of being human to have a 'spiritual' side - it would be like trying to outlaw sex, or laughter.
Religion teaches us that everything has a good and a bad side - the thing in itself is often neutral; it is the use you put it to that is good or evil. Is it not the case that religion is no different?
Posted 15 October 2010 - 10:50 PM
I wouldn't be able to argue any point regarding the spread of Islam, nor could I agree with you since I am ignorant, however I will try to find time to look it up.
In answer to your second point, I know a bit moer about this...
Scientists have studied people in meditation (buddhists), in prayer (franciscan monks) and the sort and they found that in each case where people feel they may be 'closer' to God, blood has stopped flowing to nearly all parts of their brain apart from their frontal lobes (I can't remember which one it was exactly, out of the two lobes). This may suggest that some people have a 'talent' for religion, while others simply don't. Pretty much like playing the piano - you may be a natural or you may not be.
On the other hand there is also the argument that we evolved to have more of thsi 'talent'. Scientists have found that in the middle ages and before, religious leaders believers lived for slightly longer than non-believers, which hints at the idea that religion is another survival mechanism that was created for us. Although how it makes one live longer is not known.
Sorry if it may seem as if I have gone on a tangent, but it is linked because maybe now that we live in a society that we do not need religion to guarantee our further survival as a species, we will evolve into humans where the frontal lobes are developed.
I'm not saying that a religious person is religious because he has moer developed frontal lobes than another, however this does seem to be the case among the majority.
I don't think I'd be able to argue or agree whether religion is neutral - there would have to be too many assumptions
Although I've tried to keep the above to constrained facts you may find some indication of my deism.
Posted 04 December 2010 - 09:49 PM
With this formula it is almost impossible to exclude religous beliefs.
I'd argue that religion should be allowed - but only because I'm a christian, and not because I'm an aetheist that believes religion has some form of moral quality in a modern society.
Therefore, the only way I can argue my point is by precisely giving the evidence that christianity is indeed true and thus relevant.
Although this could be argued over on many other levels, seen as this is a history forum it's only sensible to emphasise Biblical historical accuracy.
Although I don't want to use this place merely to enforce my beliefs, I hope this website can explain some of the historical truths of the Bible, but also answer general questions you might have on christianity - and thus prove that religion, or at least christianity should not and cannot be banned at all.
Posted 06 December 2010 - 10:03 PM
at least christianity should not and cannot be banned at all.
I would like to point out that the last sentence was a bit selfish (Sorry if it might sound quite offensive). The thing is that some major religions have a very similar understanding of the world like "Killing is wrong" or "you shouldn't steal". I know that it might not be a very good example, however it might still get my point to you. So I think that you somehow want to desperately turn some people into Christians and I think it is right to a certain extend. As I said most religions have very similar ways of understanding world which can mean that they were based on the same message that God gave to people, however the way that people started to understand God started to change which resulted in creation and development of many religions. So that is why I think that the Christianity should not be only religion that should not be banned if someone would be to ban religions around the world.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users