Science must destroy religion

[vsedriver]

Even today a number of branches of medical research are actively campaigned against on religious grounds. Now perhaps you could argue that IF the claims of the religion are accurate then inhibiting that scientific research may be a good thing. But clearly it is incorrect to claim that religion doesn’t inhibit scientific research at all.

yes, I will agree that religion does inhibit some medical research. Rightly so, science has been used to experiment on people because science has no morality.

 

[atheistgirl]

Link or it didn’t happen.

That’s still not even close to the extreme statements atheistgirl claims people made on here (and continues to repeat even though she still can’t provide any evidence).

I have no intention of trawling back through hundreds of posts and threads to link to prove a point to you.

Believe me, or don’t.

It was said, and by catholic and christian posters here.

Makes no difference what so ever to me whether you think that’s true or not.

Sarah x

 

[exoflare]

I have no intention of trawling back through hundreds of posts and threads to link to prove a point to you.

Believe me, or don’t.

It was said, and by catholic and christian posters here.

Makes no difference what so ever to me whether you think that’s true or not.

Sarah x

Well, if we’re going by that standard then I’d like to inform everyone that you said (somewhere on this board, I can’t be bothered to dig it up) you would go killing and pillaging everywhere if not for the chance of getting caught by law enforcement. And also if you deny this it’s just a lie to cover yourself. Proof doesn’t matter, remember… you said it whether you like it or not.

Believe me, or don’t. it makes no difference.

 

[Candide_West]

It’s a very accurate statement, CW! What has science told us about the origin of matter or energy - or the Big Bang if you like?

Quite a bit, but even if it had told us nothing that wouldn’t suddenly mean that scientific study of other subjects was impossible.*

“yet” reveals blind faith in the power of science to explain everything even though there is no reason to believe that is possible - unless you can produce one…

Nope, it is an acknowledgement of the fact that we don’t have a scientific explanation of the origin of the universe (yet) but we may do at some point in the future.*

As for why I believe this, well science has an excellent track record of explaining things which were once unexplainable. Indeed you could argue that it is the entire history of science. I simply expect this to continue for the foreseeable future.

 

[Candide_West]

Well, if we’re going by that standard then I’d like to inform everyone that you said (somewhere on this board, I can’t be bothered to dig it up) you would go killing and pillaging everywhere if not for the chance of getting caught by law enforcement. *And also if you deny this it’s just a lie to cover yourself. *Proof doesn’t matter, remember… you said it whether you like it or not.

Believe me, or don’t. it makes no difference.

Come on, that’s a rather silly reply now isn’t it. Are you really saying that you find it so hard to believe a Christian would say “since I think my morals are based on my belief in God if I lost my belief in God i’d completely lose my morals”.

In any case I too have heard this a number of times from people who appear to be genuinely nice, normal people. Of course in reality I’m sure these people are in fact mistaken and losing their faith in reality would make very little difference to their morals. But nonetheless they do say such things.*

If you need examples from this site then look up an old thread of mine called “what would you do if it were proven…”. I seem to recall that a few posters on that thread made statements to the effect that their morals would go out the window of they lost their faith.*

 

[Candide_West]

If science destroys religion it destroys itself because science is based on the Christian belief that the universe is intelligible and we are rational!

Nope, science is not based on Christian beliefs but on observation. So if Christianity and indeed all religions come to an end the scientific method will just keep right on working.

 

[Candide_West]

yes, I will agree that religion does inhibit some medical research.

Great.*

Rightly so, science has been used to experiment on people because science has no morality.

Ok, that wasn’t really what I was talking about though, because experimenting on people is generally argued to be wrong on moral grounds. I was really talking about cases where the argument is made on religious grounds.*

In any case we seem to be in agreement on the main point so it’s probably best to leave it at that unless Edwest2 has anything further to add.*

 

[Poof]

Even if I lost my faith in God, I definitely wouldn’t kill, rape or pillage but I’d definitely fall into hedonism. Still, communism will always remind us of the very dangerous idea of a godless, purposeless and amoral universe. (Just chipping in)

 

[tonyrey]

Even if I lost my faith in God, I definitely wouldn’t kill, rape or pillage but I’d definitely fall into hedonism. Still, communism will always remind us of the very dangerous idea of a godless, purposeless and amoral universe. (Just chipping in)

A licence for laissez-faire in every aspect of life!

 

[tonyrey]

Nope, science is not based on Christian beliefs but on observation. So if Christianity and indeed all religions come to an end the scientific method will just keep right on working.

The scientific method won’t just keep right on working if there is a nuclear holocaust as the result of the rejection of morality! It will come to a sudden, savage end…

The worshippers of science will have been highly successful in destroying not only religion but themselves into the bargain…

 

[Soldier_Of_God]

That’s still not even close to the extreme statements atheistgirl claims people made on here (and continues to repeat even though she still can’t provide any evidence).

Her worldview is different from ours and she recalls what suits her purposes. We must, however, try to remain charitable.

 

[atheistgirl]

Well, if we’re going by that standard then I’d like to inform everyone that you said (somewhere on this board, I can’t be bothered to dig it up) you would go killing and pillaging everywhere if not for the chance of getting caught by law enforcement. And also if you deny this it’s just a lie to cover yourself. Proof doesn’t matter, remember… you said it whether you like it or not.

Believe me, or don’t. it makes no difference.

Bye bye :tiphat:

I won’t be drawn into a personalized childish spat

As of now, your posts are no longer visible to me

Sarah x

 

[Soldier_Of_God]

The worshippers of science will have been highly successful in destroying not only religion but themselves into the bargain…

Science gives us understanding of the material world. Nothing more. How it is applied determines its utility to humanity, whether it is in the form of developing atomic weapons to kill millions or to create a vaccine to save millions. It is not a substitute for a moral or value system. Those that think so are disconnected from reality.

 

[atheistgirl]

Her worldview is different from ours

I do indeed have a different world view, but we share many things in common. One such is telling lies is not a good thing to do.

and she recalls what suits her purposes.

It’s against the rules to reveal the content of private conversations conducted via PM.

Interestingly enough, I note some of those who’ve said such things on the board, not just via pm, are no longer, how shall I put this, invited to share their views on this board. I’m sure the two are not related, but it might indicate we were dealing with a somewhat extreme kind of individual.

We must, however, try to remain charitable.

Indeed.

Sarah x

 

[Candide_West]

The scientific method won’t just keep right on working if there is a nuclear holocaust as the result of the rejection of morality! It will come to a sudden, savage end…

Ok, firstly you said religion coming to an end and not morality coming to an end. Obviously the two are completely different scenarios. I’d agree that if people suddenly lost their ability to have morals then society would almost inescapably collapse. But obviously just losing religion would have no such effect.

In any case of course your point is still incorrect, the scientific method will keep right on working no matter what happened to our species. Sure there might be no people left alive to make use of the tool but the tool would be unaffected.

The worshippers of science will have been highly successful in destroying not only religion but themselves into the bargain…

Obviously incorrect as well. Take away religion and people would still be people. They’d just be people without religion. Your prediction of a resulting global holocaust is, well rather silly.

 

[Soldier_Of_God]

Interestingly enough, I note some of those who’ve said such things on the board, not just via pm, are no longer, how shall I put this, invited to share their views on this board. I’m sure the two are not related, but it might indicate we were dealing with a somewhat extreme kind of individual.

It’s unforunate that you were exposed to them. Over-the-top comments from individuals exist but to use them as justification for ones position or to advance it only inflames others and is distortive of reality. That’s why it’s prudent to avoid making contraversial blanket or general statments.

 

[gam197]

originally posted by Al Moritz
Yeah, this translates to:
Let’s all worship at the altar of Science, with Darwin as the Patron Saint *) and Richard Dawkins as the High Priest. Sheesh.

*) Not that I have anything against Darwin the scientist.

One thing Darwin did for me was make clear that incest is bad although before Darwin married, the Church probably spoke out against it.

guardian.co.uk/science/2009/jan/19/charles-darwin

His spouse was his cousin, Emma Wedgwood. In falling for a relative he stuck to a clan tradition. The Darwins, like many among the Victorian upper crust, had long preferred to share a bed with their kin. Charles’s grandfather Josiah Wedgwood set up home with his third cousin Sarah Wedgwood. Their daughter, Susannah, chose Robert Darwin, Charles’s father. Charles’s uncle - Emma’s father - had nine offspring, four of whom married cousins. The evolutionist’s own marriage was in the end happy, with 10 children (and when his wife was in her 40s he wrote that “Emma has been very neglectful of late for we have not had a child for more than one whole year”). Even so, in Queen Victoria’s fecund days the Darwin-Wedgwood dynasty did less well than most, for among the 62 uncles, cousins and aunts (Emma and Charles included) who descended from Josiah, 38 had no progeny that survived to adulthood.

Although today some scientists would disagree -time for another thread.

Inbreeding certainly has an effect on human health, but in parts of India the children of cousins are actually healthier than others because cousin marriages are more common in families with at least some money.

 

[J_Peterson]

I’m religious because I believe in God. I get the feeling that atheists think it works the other way around. As long as God continues to reveal Himself, people will believe in Him. As long as people believe in Him there will be religion. It will never go away.

Also, I don’t believe in God because of an ignorance of science. Atheists either like to ignore or dismiss the experiential aspects of religion but they are very real.

 

[atheistgirl]

Over-the-top comments from individuals exist but to use them as justification for ones position or to advance it only inflames others and is distortive of reality.

If someone says to me, that if they lost their faith in their Deity, they would murder, rape and pillage all the day long, because they could, since morality wouldn’t exist, I have no reason to not believe them, because I know that religious extremism exists, within all religions.

I have no reason to think they are lying to me.

And in all honesty, I find that thought very troubling and quite frightening, because what happens if such a person does indeed lose their faith?

This is why I said, truthfully, there are certain people I would hope never lose their faith.

Sarah x

 

[atheistgirl]

It will never go away.

I actually think that is true. Religion will never cease.

Atheists either like to ignore or dismiss the experiential aspects of religion but they are very real.

Such as?

Have experiments been done that prove the existence of a Deity?

Sarah x