Click on a label to read posts from that part of the world.
Oct 2nd 2010 4:01PM The minority have always been perseuted in most societies. Organized religion and corrupt rulers/military generals have been primarily responsible for persecution and discrimination throughout history. The favored Church cooperated with the political ruler to provide a "God approval" to the ruler and the rulers provided police/military protection to the Church. The Churches used their position to brain wash the common man into believing negative beliefs about followers of other religions.
Christianity persecuted Jews simply because they were not Christians. The Catholics persecuted Protestants beause they were not Catholics. Muslims persecute everyone not Muslim from their beginning to this day. All religions were guilty.
Feb 24th 2010 10:15AM Let's see--a normal busy young seaman on a submarine has a sexual thought every couple hours. With females crammed into the tight work space this interval will be reduced to seconds. This is a war ship loaded with atomic weapons which needs to run like a clock. THIS IS A CRAZY IDEA.
Feb 16th 2009 3:18AM Did Obama have money set aside for one of those buses for the Wall Street and Bank executives?
Nov 21st 2007 4:46AM
The Dinesh essay “Survival of the Sacred” provides a most interesting, although terribly flawed, argument in support of religion (vs. atheism).
1. No one can prove whether a higher power is responsible for the existence of life or whether it is simple biology.
2 People feel better having a belief that our existence has some meaning above mere biological existence.
3. Religious people feel good seeking something higher than self interest and a have reason to reproduce so their progeny can also feel good and seek that higher good. Atheists have no reason to multiply because they don’t feel good even though they may refrain from doing evil.
4. Darwin's theory explains the evolutionary greater reproduction advantage of the religious.
The argument above doesn't argue that religion is good or bad only that it yields an evolutionary advantage of greater birth rate. Darwin’s theory explains adaptations of a species that enable it to better compete in their environment. But the religious people don’t have children with evolutionary advantages such as intelligence, agility, eyesight, strength or moral compass. Higher reproduction rates of segments of human races is more in response to a need for more labor to support families because of higher death rates from poorer health or wars. The higher birth rate for the religious is undoubtedly due to the exhortations of most religions to “be fruitful.” It was historically necessary to have lots of warriors to fight the religious wars in which they were always involved. In modern times in the west, to “be fruitful” is to help financially support the religious organization.
In fact, the DDS examples accept as fact that the more secular people are usually more broadly educated, more sophisticated, richer, more satisfied and have fewer children. Under the Darwin theory if it applied to belief groups separately within a species, the upper echelons of society would be considered the most evolutionarily successful because they have reasoned how best to survive most efficiently in a given environment. In fact, it could be argued historically that the poor, who are statistically more religious than general population, have been providing the cannon fodder for the economically motivated wars that have been cloaked as religious wars. Being better fit for cannon fodder would never be considered an evolutionary advantage.
Nor does the Argument deal with the divisiveness that the various religions create and maintain. Nor does it deal with the fact that so called “religious wars” have contributed to more human deaths than any other single factor and continues to do so in the Middle East and Africa.
It is certainly true that "man doesn't live by bread alone." As a general rule, secularists create a happy life for themselves without applying a great amount of their energies to support a religion that requires beliefs in things which cannot be true and must be “taken on faith.” Darwin’s Theory has never been advanced as the best measure of a person's success in life. To measure how he/she contributes to the advance of our culture is not measured by how many children one might bring into the world to carry on their religion.
In fact, generally speaking, for a couple on average to produce more that 2 1/2 children is to add to the evils that come with the over population of this planet including the continuing wars because the poorest nations with the largest populations cannot feed themselves.
In the opinion of this writer, there is one advantage that religious families do have. Intellectually challenged children are socialized to be better citizens in a religious family. It is easier to tame and imbue self control in a dull child with a strong religion upbringing that brings fear of God into close proximity. The bright child quickly reason that most religious requirements are silly but for the benefit of the family they elect to go along.