A World without Religion?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Charlemagne_III
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Code:
Charlemagne_III said:
Here’s a quote from the source you cited.

“Women identifying themselves as Protestants obtain 37.4% of all abortions in the U.S.; Catholic women account for 31.3%, Jewish women account for 1.3%, and women with no religious affiliation obtain 23.7% of all abortions.”

So what percent of Americans have no religious affiliation, and what percent of them are atheist/agnostic? This is the dark secret no one ever tells.
Click to expand...
Indeed. Such a ‘dark secret’ that I actually posted it myself. Perhaps you think that people with ‘no religious affiliation’ are the same as ‘atheist’, although if you survey the general population, you’ll find that those who class themselves as atheist in the US are less than 2% religions.pewforum.org/reports.

So maybe you think the problem is not so much with atheism as with people who do not follow a particular religion (but obviously may believe in God). Seems like it’s those who don’t class themselves as one of the gazillion different denominations available who are the problem.

So let’s go with that. These women don’t know any better. They simply do what they want because they have no church to follow. The majority of these women believe in God (otherwise they would class themselves as atheist) but they have abortions. Just the same as three quarters of all the other women who believe in God and consider themselves as part of an organised religion (that being Christian)

It would therefore seem that a belief in God is no restriction on having an abortion. It would therefore seem that not having a belief in God is not an encouragement to having an abortion. It is therefore seem that being a Christian is no restriction on having an abortion. It can again be pointed out that, whatever statistics you would like to believe, that Catholic women are possibly the worst offenders.

And you still want to point the finger at atheism as the problem? Yes you do, because you don’t want to face it yourself. You don’t want to see, let alone admit, that the problem is internal.

You complain about liberalism. You complain about loose morals. You complain about all the problems in society without realising that a huge part of your church is part of the problem. Remove everyone from your denomination who doesn’t follow everything necessary to be considered a member and you have one of the smallest churches on the planet.

Look to yourself. The problem is not with the few ungodly that post here or the tiny minority in the general population. The problem is in-house. And will not be solved. Because you refuse to face it.
 
Regarding abortion statistics in the States a few relative facts are in order:
  1. Black and Hispanic Women account for more than half off all abortions, which occur mostly in inner city areas. In fact black womens abortion rates are 4 times that of white women.
  2. Margaret Sanger founded Planned Parenthood.** She was a socialist and atheist and targeted black and Hispanic women. **
  3. When the Democrat Party embraced abortion as a party platform so did to blacks and Hispanics as a voting bloc regardless of their religious affiliation and as such embrace the party platform of approving of abortion and homosexual rights.
  4. The Democrat Party ideology is anything but Christian, but in fact is **Atheist in ideology and practice.
    **
    In summary, religious affiliation in the US takes a back seat to political affiliation in terms of moral issues such as abortion and homosexuality. The Democrat Party is in is essence godless and strives to convince Christians to abandon their beliefs on the basis that it is best for them and their country.
 
Bradski said:
. . . How about all Catholic women make a pledge not to have one…
Click to expand...
The best I can do is try to do God’s will as best as I can discern it,
There is lots of information on that, but the problem is in the follow through.

The big part of the problem is the lie people are being told about the child they carry.
A perhaps bigger problem is the breakdown in the family and the social network.

Looking at the stats, in particular:
Jewish women account for 1.3%
Click to expand...
Now, this might sound like stereotyping, but the large majority of people I know are Jews, and they are rich by most standards. I am basing this on the people I have known all my life.
There is a strong sense of family and community. They may not like each other but they are there when needed. The person has a deep sense of identity with Judaism, even if they do not keep Kosher. I am pretty sure that the people I know can and will avoid becoming statistics and the 1.3 may not be valid. It is also my impression that an atheistic Jew would likely not report themselves as being Jewish on such a questionnaire. They have all the protective factors when it comes to abortion.

So, does this mean that sin is not an issue?
No. What it means is that when put to the test, some of us will sin.
Would Cain have slain Abel if God had preferred his sacrifice? No.

My guess is that those who identify themselves as atheists are in better socioeconomic circumstances than the majority of people.
Of course you will not see them appear in significantly larger numbers at abortion clinics. There is no need. And, this would have very little to do with their beliefs.

I would say that even though we may not be complicit in assisting with abortions or in propagating the great lie about the unborn, we share the guilt in not doing what is within our means to make this a better more loving society.
 
Sarcelle said:
Richard Dawkins should try living in Communist China to see how he likes it. If he is right, China would be heaven on earth right now.
Click to expand...
China has the highest homicide rate in the world at 1400 per 100,000. This is calculated including abortion which is defined as homicide by the Catechism.
 
DaddyGirl said:
I think a world without religion has the potential to have an even higher moral ground than a world with religion.

First, because people can and will understand and see that they can love and be good to each other without needing the threat of eternal punishment if they do not.

Second, all the negatives of religion–the hate or exclusion or putting down of those who believe differently than you–will be removed, and we can truly be as one group working together. Religion has often* divided* people instead of bringing them together.

Third, we will concentrate on building a more loving and better world today, here, together…instead of waiting to have it after death.

The methods and results under Hitler, Stalin, and Mao etc were not necessarily because of a lack of religion.
Hitler, as we know, was brought up Catholic and engraved the Nazi belt buckles with the phrase, “God is with us”.
Stalin was brought up Orthodox, I think.
If these leaders were morally twisted and/or carried out harmful regimes, it was not necessarily due to lack of religion.There can be a number of factors for this.

And we’ve seen religious leaders in the past who have been very harmful to people–there have been several popes in the past, for example, who have been extremely immoral.

And I bet there are Atheist leaders who would treat their people and other countries with respect and reason.

.
Click to expand...
Surely you have been here long enough to know that the Church does not endorse the evils you mentioned above. Ask yourself this question. Are the evils committed because of Catholicism or in spite of it? If it is in spite of it why blame the Church for what it never taught? If it is because of it, can you tell which teaching of the Catholic church endorses it? Proof is on you.
 
BrassAnkles said:
  1. The Democrat Party ideology is anything but Christian, but in fact is **Atheist in ideology and practice.
    **
    In summary, religious affiliation in the US takes a back seat to political affiliation in terms of moral issues such as abortion and homosexuality. The Democrat Party is in is essence godless and strives to convince Christians to abandon their beliefs on the basis that it is best for them and their country.
Click to expand...
And the Republican Party is CINO, Christian in Name Only. At least when it comes to morality on economic issues (and no, don’t come with trumpeting the ‘subsidiarity pricinciple’ as convenient excuse) and abortion on the federal level. Not to talk about the ‘trickle down’ economy that even the current Pope condemned. The Republican Party is about power first, morality second.

That is why they will never do anything about abortion on the federal level, only in states that are safe for them anyway. It would have adverse effects on their power, but they get gullible Christians to vote for them anyway.
 
patrick457 said:
I’ll admit, when Dawkins says “a world without religion” I kinda get this vibe that he really means “a secular humanist / Western atheist world” - in other words, a world where everyone thinks pretty much like him.

And this is really my problem: many Westerners - theists or not - seem to, I don’t know how to put this, kinda have this assumption that the world revolves around their (Western) concepts. This can’t be helped - that’s the worldview they were brought up in. And to some extent, this is true: the West occupies a large niche in the modern world, so very often, the Western definition of things and view of the world become the ‘standard’. In our time, the West decides what words and concepts mean in the global arena. But the Western worldview is hardly the only worldview there is: not every people in the world share the Western perceptions of what things are. And just because the Western understanding of things has become pervasive does not necessarily mean that it is the single, ‘right’ or the ‘superior’ way to see the world.

So what concerns me is, Dawkins speaks of “a world without religion,” does that mean that we non-Westerners will have to conform to Dawkins’ - no, to modern Western perceptions - of what ‘religion’, ‘reason’ and ‘superstition’ are, of what ‘history’ and ‘myth’ are? I’m more of a person who think that diversity is one of the things that makes us human. That’s why I find the Borg in Star Trek scary. And to be frank, this prospect seems to me to be similar to that: it strips us humans of our individuality, of our ability to have different perspectives, of different ways of seeing the world. It’s just about as bad as Christian evangelists who force the Western understanding of Christianity into a tribe who have a different worldview than the Western - Greco-Roman - one.

Sorry for the rant. Please continue.

(P.S. Addressing the Christian angle: I’m in the camp that thinks that ‘Christianity’ is not automatically synonymous with the Western expression of it. Christianity may have influenced Western culture, and - but I do not think that the Western - Greco-Roman - understanding of Christianity is Christianity itself. That’s why I’m also kinda opposed to Christians who seem to act as if the Western - European - form of Christianity is the only ‘correct’ one.)
Click to expand...
Great post.

👍
 
Al_Moritz said:
And the Republican Party is CINO, Christian in Name Only. At least when it comes to morality on economic issues (and no, don’t come with trumpeting the ‘subsidiarity pricinciple’ as convenient excuse) and abortion on the federal level. Not to talk about the ‘trickle down’ economy that even the current Pope condemned. The Republican Party is about power first, morality second.

That is why they will never do anything about abortion on the federal level, only in states that are safe for them anyway. It would have adverse effects on their power, but they get gullible Christians to vote for them anyway.
Click to expand...
The Republic Party is indeed increasingly departing from God, that is why our country is going downhill.

However, to state that there aren’t any conscientious Christians in the Republican Party fighting to get abortion outlawed that would not be correct, to say the least. Apart from appointing conservative SC judges there are congressmen trying to do it via legislation.

For example the "Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002’’ was introduced by a Pro Life Republican (can there be a pro life Democrat?) not only to protect children that survive abortion but also to try to get Federal Law to address once and for all at what point should the Constitution recognize a human life as opposed to defining it via a proxy determination of fetal viability. In fact in countries where abortion is outlawed it is common for the constitution to recognize the scientific fact that human life is created at conception and natural this person is recognized as a citizen with full constitutional protection. This is what we pro-lifers want in the US, but the godless Democrats will not allow it, as abortion is a party platform that supersede any Christian values any party members might have.

The aforementioned bill was introduced and later modified to included the following statement for obvious reasons:

(c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to affirm, deny,
expand, or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to
any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to
being ‘born alive’ as defined in this section.’"

Here is the original bill:
gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-106hr4292ih/pdf/BILLS-106hr4292ih.pdf

Here is the law that has the additional language:
gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-107hr2175enr/pdf/BILLS-107hr2175enr.pdf
 
BrassAnkles said:
The Republic Party is indeed increasingly departing from God,
Click to expand...
Good that you are able to see that it gravely falters in its moral values.
However, to state that there aren’t any conscientious Christians in the Republican Party fighting to get abortion outlawed that would not be correct, to say the least.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Yet for the most part that doesn’t fundamentally affect what I said above, exceptions granted like the one you cite.
 
Al_Moritz said:
Good that you are able to see that it gravely falters in its moral values.

Agreed. Yet for the most part that doesn’t fundamentally affect what I said above, exceptions granted like the one you cite.
Click to expand...
To give credit where it is due the Republican Party has not embraced abortion as a party platform but rather would limit abortion and would not allow public funds to be used. This is significant since the** Party of Death gives HUNDREDS of millions of dollars ANNUALLY to Planned Parenthood** to perform abortions for **MOSTLY **young and unwitting black and hispanic women.

Therefore it is disingenuous to compare the two parties in this regard because they are at opposite ends of the spectrum.
 
Al_Moritz said:
What is your country, if I may ask?
Click to expand...
It could be any country except for totalitarian secular or “Islamic” states where there is no popular voice in the matter.
But in democratic countries, we do get the opportunity to “throw the rascals out” every few years, which may prevent things from getting worse.
 
Bradski said:
Code:
Indeed. Such a ‘dark secret’ that I actually posted it myself. Perhaps you think that people with ‘no religious affiliation’ are the same as ‘atheist’, although if you survey the general population, you’ll find that those who class themselves as atheist in the US are less than 2% religions.pewforum.org/reports.

So maybe you think the problem is not so much with atheism as with people who do not follow a particular religion (but obviously may believe in God). Seems like it’s those who don’t class themselves as one of the gazillion different denominations available who are the problem.

So let’s go with that. These women don’t know any better. They simply do what they want because they have no church to follow. The majority of these women believe in God (otherwise they would class themselves as atheist) but they have abortions. Just the same as three quarters of all the other women who believe in God and consider themselves as part of an organised religion (that being Christian)

It would therefore seem that a belief in God is no restriction on having an abortion. It would therefore seem that not having a belief in God is not an encouragement to having an abortion. It is therefore seem that being a Christian is no restriction on having an abortion. It can again be pointed out that, whatever statistics you would like to believe, that Catholic women are possibly the worst offenders.

And you still want to point the finger at atheism as the problem? Yes you do, because you don’t want to face it yourself. You don’t want to see, let alone admit, that the problem is internal.

You complain about liberalism. You complain about loose morals. You complain about all the problems in society without realising that a huge part of your church is part of the problem. Remove everyone from your denomination who doesn’t follow everything necessary to be considered a member and you have one of the smallest churches on the planet.

Look to yourself. The problem is not with the few ungodly that post here or the tiny minority in the general population. The problem is in-house. And will not be solved. Because you refuse to face it.
Click to expand...
Ah yes. Religion bad. Atheism good.

Whatever. :rolleyes:

“So maybe you think the problem is not so much with atheism as with people who do not follow a particular religion (but obviously may believe in God).”

Another non sequitur. How many Deists are getting abortions?

Your “may believe” is telling.
 
ThinkingSapien said:
I

On a related note, from the BBC a few days ago

“Will Religion Ever Disappear” (text / audio )
Click to expand...
That article you’ve posted is very interesting much of which I agree with, as I expect some atheists would, since there are so many different types of them ranging from moderate and tolerant to the other extreme.

Just a final comment. Pope Francis has stated something I recall Pope John Paul also referred to, “You don’t have to believe in God to get to heaven”.something I feel most Catholics and other Christians who believe in a loving God would agree with.
independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/pope-francis-assures-atheists-you-dont-have-to-believe-in-god-to-go-to-heaven-8810062.html
 
rose_kelly said:
That article you’ve posted is very interesting much of which I agree with, as I expect some atheists would, since there are so many different types of them ranging from moderate and tolerant to the other extreme.

Just a final comment. Pope Francis has stated something I recall Pope John Paul also referred to, “You don’t have to believe in God to get to heaven”.something I feel most Catholics and other Christians who believe in a loving God would agree with.
independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/pope-francis-assures-atheists-you-dont-have-to-believe-in-god-to-go-to-heaven-8810062.html
Click to expand...
This comment has to be qualified of course. For example a person who has not received the Gospel adequately would not be judged the same way a person who has received the Gospel because that would be not just and God cannot be unjust.

However, if a person has heard the Gospel and rejects Jesus Christ still knowing He is the Son of God then this puts them in a precarious position. Jesus Christ Himslef makes this clear:

"Everyone who acknowledges me before others I will acknowledge before my heavenly Father. But whoever denies me before others, I will deny before my heavenly Father"

Therefore, the last thing any Christian should do is tell others believing in Christ is not necessary, and of course the Pope never stated that. He was merely addressing those that have not received the Gospel fully. We Christians are to spread the Gospel so people can receive it and thus have life more fully and fulfill the Lord’s command to us.
 
Charlemagne_III said:
Ah yes. Religion bad. Atheism good.

Whatever. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Well, to be fair, I don’t think that’s what Bradski said. He does have a point though, belief in God does not equal morality. That’s a fact, however we may feel uncomfortable with it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top