Latest British Social Survey finds 52% of the Country are non Religious

[Wales-Bales]

Re: Latest British Social Survey finds 52% of the Country are non Religious

All of the religious people i know aren't well behaved because they believe in god, infact sometimes they're not that well behaved, because they're just people who have faith, or use their faith when they need it most, in short, they're standard human beings like the rest of us and their religious beliefs aren't even discussed. The problem with debates like this is that there's a backhanded nod towards religious fanatics and those who hold the seats of power within the religious establishment, the extreme elements within religion who have done some attrocious things in the name of god. By people referring to them sort of justifies their own misconceptions on people who have faith, and in some cases their hatred towards religion. Here's something, most religious people are moderate, plenty of them don't believe or certainly don't practise what is said in their holy book, how could they? I've no problem with people attacking the establishment or questioning their motives, but i do have an issue with the lazy misconceptions that some people hold (because it suits them to think that way) about people who have faith, which is exactly what they're doing when their attitudes are as intolerent and dissmissive as the religious figures that they so despise.

I'd say 6 out of the 10 commandments are very good, and if people adhered to them there wouldn't be a need for thousand of useless laws.

[Baloo]

Re: Latest British Social Survey finds 52% of the Country are non Religious

All of the religious people i know aren't well behaved because they believe in god, infact sometimes they're not that well behaved, because they're just people who have faith, or use their faith when they need it most, in short, they're standard human beings like the rest of us and their religious beliefs aren't even discussed. The problem with debates like this is that there's a backhanded nod towards religious fanatics and those who hold the seats of power within the religious establishment, the extreme elements within religion who have done some attrocious things in the name of god. By people referring to them sort of justifies their own misconceptions on people who have faith, and in some cases their hatred towards religion. Here's something, most religious people are moderate, plenty of them don't believe or certainly don't practise what is said in their holy book, how could they? I've no problem with people attacking the establishment or questioning their motives, but i do have an issue with the lazy misconceptions that some people hold (because it suits them to think that way) about people who have faith, which is exactly what they're doing when their attitudes are as intolerent and dissmissive as the religious figures that they so despise.

I was replying to a post that talked about consequences and just doing what you like.

I’m not sure why you posted all that tbh. I know some liberal quakers and one of them is non-theist. I completely understand religion is a broad spectrum.

[Taunton Blue Genie]

Re: Latest British Social Survey finds 52% of the Country are non Religious

How many Christians know how the 'books' in the current versions of the Bible were selected, when and by whom? And who wrote those individual books and when? And what books have been ignored and why?

[goats]

Re: Latest British Social Survey finds 52% of the Country are non Religious

And now politicians and laws keeps people in order. It's the same thing really

They try too you mean, there are lots of people I’ve known who dont really follow any rules.....

[RonnieBird]

Re: Latest British Social Survey finds 52% of the Country are non Religious

You refer to 'absolute truth' in one of your posts. How do you define this?

Don't recall using that expression but I expect you're right.

It's all about subjective versus objective reality.

In subjective reality what you believe is supposed to be your particular truth and thus according to some,as valid as any other truth.
" perception is reality" if you like.
This is the prevailing philosophy since it was honed to a fine art by the dreadful Bertrand Russel.

Objective reality calls for "Ontic trust" , although perhaps let's not go there right now. Suffice it to say that it rejects the idea that there are alternative truths - there may be alternative versions , but only one is actually true and all the rest are either lies or mistakes.

Now,in the same way that man is not in himself capable of good or evil, but rather chooses which of these forces to lean towards, he isn't capable of discerning the truth for himself using only his own mind or logic - again he instead has to choose between two alternative and opposing versions , and must use his other abilities to do this. The abilities I speak of are his spiritual aspect, and of course ,in the event that man rejects or disbelieves that he even has such a component, it cannot help him.

One side will tell you that there is no such thing as absolute truth and the other will tell you that there is. As in most areas of human existence ,you must choose which to believe and you have free will to do that.

[The Gifaffe]

Re: Latest British Social Survey finds 52% of the Country are non Religious

https://youtu.be/8r-e2NDSTuE
In a nutshell.

Better still... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-suvkwNYSQo

[RonnieBird]

Re: Latest British Social Survey finds 52% of the Country are non Religious

Being non-religious is not ‘doing what you like’. It’s actually quite possible for non-religious people to live a good life and to behave ethically just to make the most of the one life we have and not due to a fear of supernatural consequences.

This again comes down to a very similar argument to that which I very briefly and reluctantly set out regarding truth above.

Please read that post because 90% of it is the same.

In this case though, it's objective versus subjective MORALITY.

Is morality defined by an outside and superior authority, or do we simply make it up as we go along to suit our own priorities ?

If we do that then no two versions will be the same ,and who will decide which version is correct ?

Is it possible to vary the rules of football on personal preference and still win the league, or do we need a predefined set of rules which everyone has to play by whether or not they agree with them ?

Join that up with my previous post about alternative realities and you will see how easily someone could be acting immorally whilst earnestly believing that they are being moral and ethical.

I know I'm brushing over this huge subject quickly and we can revisit it but I'm knackered and I've got to put the groceries away before the cold stuff melts all over the table !

[Tuerto]

Re: Latest British Social Survey finds 52% of the Country are non Religious

I was replying to a post that talked about consequences and just doing what you like.

I’m not sure why you posted all that tbh. I know some liberal quakers and one of them is non-theist. I completely understand religion is a broad spectrum.

Fair enough, sorry for the ramble, it wasn't specifcally aimed at you. It's something i have quite a strong opinion on as i know quite alot of religious people and they're some of the most moderate and understanding people i've ever met, they'd be like that without religion, it just so happems that they do have faith.

[Taunton Blue Genie]

Re: Latest British Social Survey finds 52% of the Country are non Religious

This again comes down to a very similar argument to that which I very briefly and reluctantly set out regarding truth above.

Please read that post because 90% of it is the same.

In this case though, it's objective versus subjective MORALITY.

Is morality defined by an outside and superior authority, or do we simply make it up as we go along to suit our own priorities ?

If we do that then no two versions will be the same ,and who will decide which version is correct ?

Is it possible to vary the rules of football on personal preference and still win the league, or do we need a predefined set of rules which everyone has to play by whether or not they agree with them ?

Join that up with my previous post about alternative realities and you will see how easily someone could be acting immorally whilst earnestly believing that they are being moral and ethical.

I know I'm brushing over this huge subject quickly and we can revisit it but I'm knackered and I've got to put the groceries away before the cold stuff melts all over the table !

The bit I highlighted is quite amusing when there are so many religions on the planet and them all not in perfect sync regarding morality. And human beings are sometimes better at creating a form of morality by way of laws when religions have barbaric and mysogenistic tendencies. And religions are always prone to new schisms due to internal disagreements. Abrahamism illustrates this aspect very strongly indeed. And there is always revisionism where morality is interpreted anew e.g. homosexuality in Christian churches.
Oh yeah, guess who wrote all the so-called holy books. Human beings.

[William Treseder]

Re: Latest British Social Survey finds 52% of the Country are non Religious

Better still... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-suvkwNYSQo

👍

[RonnieBird]

Re: Latest British Social Survey finds 52% of the Country are non Religious

The bit I highlighted is quite amusing when there are so many religions on the planet and them all not in perfect sync regarding morality. And human beings are sometimes better at creating a form of morality by way of laws when religions have barbaric and mysogenistic tendencies. And religions are always prone to new schisms due to internal disagreements. Abrahamism illustrates this aspect very strongly indeed. And there is always revisionism where morality is interpreted anew e.g. homosexuality in Christian churches.
Oh yeah, guess who wrote all the so-called holy books. Human beings.

I did say that reading my previous post regarding objective reality was important in terms of this one. In it, I made the point that there may be any number of alternative " truths" but only one can be correct. Therefore there are many religions which can't all be correct -


So what ? Since you are free to choose your religion - including the one which you have unwittingly chosen - you can choose which set of rules you accept. It's still not going to work if you make it up as you go along.

You prove this in your own posts by declaring religions to be barbaric and mysogenistic, which is your opinion but is that enforceable on others just because you say so ? If so, are my opinions enforceable on you too, or is it all purely up to the individual to decide for himself ? Of course, that's just another way of saying " do what you like".

Schisms are not legitimate parts of religions by the way, but that's another issue.

I'm afraid your last point about religious books being written by human beings is a very old argument which is quite silly really since all books are written by human beings aren't they ? Books about Polar Bears aren't actually written by Polar Bears and yet I believe some of them are quite accurate.

[Heathblue]

Re: Latest British Social Survey finds 52% of the Country are non Religious

Christened Cafolic.
Bin to Rome to see da pope give Mass at St, Peters square.
currently agnostic.
Religun is IMO a mass control tool of division.
They want you divided by
Religion
Race
Colour
Sex
Divided you are weak
Together you are strong
Q

[RonnieBird]

Re: Latest British Social Survey finds 52% of the Country are non Religious

Christened Cafolic.
Bin to Rome to see da pope give Mass at St, Peters square.
currently agnostic.
Religun is IMO a mass control tool of division.
They want you divided by
Religion
Race
Colour
Sex
Divided you are weak
Together you are strong
Q

Well religion can be used as a tool for division and no doubt it often has been, but so can lots of other things. It doesn't mean that religion itself is bad if people misuse it.

[Taunton Blue Genie]

Re: Latest British Social Survey finds 52% of the Country are non Religious

I did say that reading my previous post regarding objective reality was important in terms of this one. In it, I made the point that there may be any number of alternative " truths" but only one can be correct. Therefore there are many religions which can't all be correct -


So what ? Since you are free to choose your religion - including the one which you have unwittingly chosen - you can choose which set of rules you accept. It's still not going to work if you make it up as you go along.

You prove this in your own posts by declaring religions to be barbaric and mysogenistic, which is your opinion but is that enforceable on others just because you say so ? If so, are my opinions enforceable on you too, or is it all purely up to the individual to decide for himself ? Of course, that's just another way of saying " do what you like".

Schisms are not legitimate parts of religions by the way, but that's another issue.

I'm afraid your last point about religious books being written by human beings is a very old argument which is quite silly really since all books are written by human beings aren't they ? Books about Polar Bears aren't actually written by Polar Bears and yet I believe some of them are quite accurate.

I didn't state that religions are barbaric and misogynistic per se. I used the words 'sometimes' and 'when' in that sentence. As for your reference about polar bears it is fair to say that the evidence we have is backed up by science. How many religions can have the same said about them? And do you think that your god is the right one and all the others are wrong? (which is a claim held by many believers whatever their chosen deity/deities is/are? How do account for the multitude of Abrahamist schisms and if your own religion is of that ilk how do you know that you are on the correct version. Let's be honest, most religious believers don't choose their religion by careful analysis and having investigated thousands of religions: they take on the religion passed down to them as a child and defend it as the only true religion that exists.
Had you been born in a different bed on this planet you would probably be a believer in a different deity. It's rarely about free choice, I'm afraid.

[Wales-Bales]

Re: Latest British Social Survey finds 52% of the Country are non Religious

Know your realities - Objective Reality v Fictional Reality