Religious teachings are like that, it seems, for most people. Bigotry and racism in the name of religion is quite common. In that, religion is no different than other cultural practices.

Religion has been used both to justify slavery and to do battle against slavery. Religion has been used to both respect others and to disrespect others. It is no better than non-religion, since it's all a matter of interpretation of its own teachings.

No matter their beliefs, or their positions, they often fall short.

I look at each one individually, to see how they behave. One thing I can guarantee is that religion plays very little role in that, based on more than half a century of observation as an adult.

Admonitions in scripture have little effect on human behavior. Nor does teaching in churches, and even there, what is taught is often at odds with what is written, regardless of religion.

And justify it with patriotism, or religion, or ideology.

Apparently, all three lead people astray and justify their wrongdoings. Proof texts abound in all three.

None of those three things are any assurance that those who follow them will do the right thing. So, I ask you, of what use are they? Of what value are they to human cultures and societies. I think they are of no value at all, in the end.

People are what they have evolved to be and have been taught to be. Individuals carry with them both genetic and social aspects. Which of those aspects they make their priorities or habits are what determines how they will behave.

Religion has no intrinsic value for good, any more than for bad. It is merely another expression of human nature. More evidence for it not being of some sort of divine origin, but rather a product of the human mind.

As is intolerance for the other.

As expected.

I understand your desire to frame things in the way that you want them to be framed, but life is far more complex than that.

I agree.

Some are very far from great.

Both are in the Koran and in Islam's history.

And both have support from people who identify as Muslim.

So there we are. If you want to promote the good, you can't ignore the bad, because both are equally valid interpretations.

argle-bargle!

AIYEEEEEEEE!!!

Don't forget the meetup is tonight, BTW, at the Church of the Sacred Bleeding Heart of Jesus,
located somewhere in Los Angeles, California.

You mean the In-and-Out on Olympic?

the sacred cups, bags and wrappings. We shall partake of the Double-Double Animal Style burger in remembrance of something or other.

Last week someone threatened to call the health dept over the cups that had 2 Kings 18:27 on them.

Not sure if the lifetime ban goes for all of us at all locations, but best to wait till those folks turn the other cheek.

I'll settle for Rubios, but no way in hell will I step into an El Pollo Loco ever again.

Not sure why we stopped going there.

and to work against the bad. But the fight is also against human nature.

You admit religion is at least partially to blame for the bad. This is progress.

I knew it was wrong to be optimistic.

Realize that, or fall into the error of blaming words rather than human behavior.

and they occur in a book which is purported to be the word of a god...

then yes, the words share some of the blame.

It is sad that you cannot accept this, but yet at the same time are so eager to credit religion when people do good things in its name.

The double standard is clear. You believe religion is absolutely blameless for the bad things, but gets all the credit for the good.

I acknowledge that both can happen.

You believe only one can happen when it comes to religion.

That is my "framing." Please tell me how it is wrong.

And your second.

Your third is mis-framing, as my many "bad news" posts prove.

Clear up my confusion.

Choose an answer:

A) "Yes, I believe religion can inspire bad behavior."

or

B) "No, I don't believe religion can inspire bad behavior."

That is obvious.

Understood. But understanding what motivates people can be complex.

Because it challenges your own preferred framing? Interesting...

Framing belongs inside the walls of an argument.

But anyone else is breaking whatever commandment you pulled out of you ass this morning. I understand.

You explain almost everything by
1) humans are humans
2) tribalism
3) intolerance.

Did I leave anything out? Excuse me, I have to go tolerate my wife now.

Last edited Thu Jan 24, 2019, 02:53 PM - Edit history (1)

And ignoring the obvious leads to faulty logic.

A question: would you tell your wife that you are going to "tolerate her"?

If so, you are far braver than I am.

They are invalidated by their being anecdotal dogshit.

in an effort to make a point?

And there are so many such posts. So very many.

I understand that my observations, observations of tactics going back to 2014, make some uncomfortable. But when one posts on an open board, one should expect that all posts will serve as a record.

And you're free to reject them outright as well if that's your fancy.

Perhaps this is not obvious to you?

As for my wife, I always tell her how much I tolerate her, since I learned here that almost all problems are caused by intolerance. She does sometimes refuse to speak to me when I say that, so I explain that she is being intolerant which is no different than sending me to a Chinese re-education camp. Then she wants to send me to husband re-education camp, so you can see how humans always just act like humans, and due to intolerance, always want to send others to re-education camps. I managed to avoid going by explaining that sending me to a re-education camp will not end all cases of bad husbands. She then she suggested I buy her flowers, but I pointed out that flowers die, so her logic was faulty.

So yes, it would be good if you tolerated your wife, but I accept that you are human and humans are intolerant.

Just in case you don't see the obvious:

Far braver than I would be.

Flowers do die, but chocolates always taste good, so I give my wife chocolate.
And, she shares.

observations that ends up totally missing the point of what a good husband ought to do, never addressing the real thing I missed. You do that a lot on this forum. Since you are still married, I assume you do not do this with your wife. Why do you do it here?

that we engage with each other in good faith.

But if a person mis-frames or misunderstands a post as "child rape apologia" when that is clearly not the case, I might wonder about the good faith aspect of the interaction.

Or if some few people constantly display the same attack tactics toward theists posting here, I might wonder again.

Or if some few insist that theism demonstrates a lack of intellect, I might wonder at that also.

So good faith requires certain behaviors. And good faith discussion requires the same behaviors.

If they think theism is stupid, that's not bad faith. That's an opinion. If they find certain things to be "child rape apologia" that's also an opinion. It is an inflammatory opinion on a sensitive topic, but still not bad faith. If people repeatedly make the same arguments over and over, well, people are people. They can only act like themselves. Not bad faith either.

Good faith discussion requires only the assumption that the other party is giving you their honest opinion. There is no other requirement. Disagreement or distaste for their tactics does not in any way imply bad faith.

Just as I figured. You don't believe religion can ever inspire bad behavior. Thank you for establishing your bias for all to see.

...as long as they are Muslims... and men.

And this:

The words except by piety and good action. Think on it a little bit. It'll eventually make sense.

Of course, there are other parts of the book where Mohammed explicitly mentions the worth of women, and how Muslims should interact with non-Muslims. Which is a funny thing to do if you think everyone is equal.

OR HAS I TAKEN THAT TOOK LITURALLY?

Or lay out your reasoning that led you to this point.

I suggest you have no intention of conversing in good faith. I suggest I make a sandwhich instead.

That's a good suggestion. I'm gonna make a sandwich instead.

An excellent sandwich.

Falafel is fried. Not good for the heart.

If not falafel, how about egg salad?

Along with roasted potatoes, rice pilaf, and fattoush salad... now you've gone and made me hungry.

It is great on pita, and the saffron rice is great on the side.

You really don't ever read what you post, do you? Thanks, I guess. Makes it easier to point and laugh at you for directly contradicting what you think you're trying to say.

When people take his quotes out of context that seem to support their views, and ignore the ones that condemn them.

So perfect for theists.

So it is not too shocking that theists might quote him.