English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I believe 'plague' is the word he used.

2007-07-06 14:46:49 · 16 answers · asked by St. Tom Cruise 3 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

16 answers

How can this be denied when one has a TV and watches the news channels..?

No skirting the issues, avoiding the topic, or dancing around the facts can deny that people are killing each other with "god on their side" every day..

You are either part of the problem, or part of the solution people..!

2007-07-06 14:52:43 · answer #1 · answered by Commonancestor 2 · 2 2

Religion has appear at the begining of time, to bring humans together and survived phenomenons that could not be explained... This has allowed humans to interpret their environments and survived numerous difficulties. It was also a social plan to help a society to develop and prosper while at the same time keep stability and relative peace in such society.

So, I believed that if sciences would arrived tomorrow and tell us that she knows everything in our world and can explain how everything works and all natural phenomenons can now be explained and controlled, then I will say that religions may become unecessary for human kinds. But I do not see the day, when sciences will be capable to claim it knows everything it must know about, and have experienced enough things to know that the more you know about the world, the least you understand, as every discoveries bring more and more questions to answer.

So I do believed that religions still have a place in our society, and this for a while, but I do not have to agree with the institutions that pushes them in my throat! I want to remind a free thinker, as it is the only thing that suits me!

2007-07-06 15:00:06 · answer #2 · answered by Jedi squirrels 5 · 0 0

Yes. Religion has always been bad for humanity. Slaughtering people in the name of something that may or may not exist isn't a good thing, is it? Spirituality, on the other hand, is not such a bad thing because spirituality is stictly personal and not dependant on falling into a dogmatic structure of comfortable, mind numbing routines (like church) where a person can easily be taken advantage of. Religion is a plague. I agree. I think religion stops humanity from reaching it's full potential for goodness.

2007-07-06 15:00:48 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

This is a one sided question but I'll try and give a two sided answer the formal religions often preach hate as well as they preach love .And I'd like to add as much as I respect and appreciate what Richards Dawkins is trying to do I wish there was more thought put into a paradigm for the future ethical and or moral welfare of society. I've thought of the damage caused by religion in my life and the benefit as well and would not like to see it all trashed for the riddance of the unchangeable bad side; maybe it could be upgraded or started from scratch . there are billions who can benefit .
peace

2007-07-06 14:57:54 · answer #4 · answered by dogpatch USA 7 · 0 1

Dawkins philosophy is Darwinism--He has refused to debate with Michael Denton who has challenged him to do so. Darwinism is becoming a religion rather than a science. Consult Darwinism refuted. com. A complete Scientific break down is showing there. See ISCID--michael Denton--for futher detail of the collapse of Darwinism. These men are Scientist who have found fault with Darwinism. The Science community is being told bs for facts and they are accepting them. Wake up. Dawkins has his own agenta

2007-07-06 15:11:37 · answer #5 · answered by j.wisdom 6 · 1 0

I consider Dawkins, truly. that may not a rely of purely rejecting religions. The Soviets tried that and failed miserably. we ought to discover a thank you to enhance out of the choose for religions. I desire I knew some magic way of speeding this technique up, yet i will't arise with one. it appears that evidently this is not any longer possibly obtainable to velocity up a organic develop technique. it would be like attempting to peel back a rose bud so as that one would desire to appreciate the flower. It purely does not artwork. yet easy does motivate develop. And here Dawkins and that i are respiration the comparable air. by residing an enlightened existence type, possibly, with out even which potential to, our easy would reason yet another flower to open. Kuma Edit: the coolest works executed interior the call of religion does not excuse the organisation's loss of humanity. The Salvation military would feed the homeless, yet they gave super sums of money from their donations to combat gay marriage in Calif., as an occasion. i might placed up that the comparable human beings now working to income others could be doing much greater to help their fellow human beings, in the event that they weren't weighted down by the regulations of their faith.

2016-10-01 01:27:24 · answer #6 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

It is not so much religion as it is ideals. Without religion (that will never happen), there would still be philosophies and idealism. These bring about more problems than anything. This is the main thrust of our war on terrorism - it is a war of ideals. You couple that with human pride and arrogance stirred with stubbornness, you have strife, arguments, wars, violence, lust for power, greed, totalitarianism, communism and so on.

So, no - Mr. Dawkins is mistaken.

2007-07-06 15:03:39 · answer #7 · answered by TroothBTold 5 · 2 0

No, and for the record I'm an atheist. I just think religion is an inevitable byproduct of society. People will always have some need for fantasy, enchantment, ritualized expression, answers when it comes to spirituality or personal meaning, etc. Religion is a convenient way to get all of these in one manageable framework. Even if religion were to disappear one day, people would just find another way of channeling these needs.

I think religion is for the most part fine so long as it's used as a personal TOOL, and not pushed as a global CAUSE. Unfortunately you don't have to do much searching to find some really ugly examples of the latter.

2007-07-06 14:50:08 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3 2

Richard Dawkins is out to capitalize on disillusionment with religion in order to make himself a sh*tload of money. I believe that seeking true answers is what's good for humanity. That rules out a lot of religious stuff, but it rules out Richard Dawkins, too.

2007-07-06 14:50:59 · answer #9 · answered by Patrick C 4 · 1 3

No... Richard Dawkins is a blinded, bigoted fool (He said "It is absolutely safe to say that if you meet somebody who claims not to belive in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid, or insane (or wicked, but I'd rather not consider that).")who clings to the theory of evolution. For instance he blamed all religion on the 9-11 attacks...
Some religions have been extremly benifical to the world... Christianity (if you doubt this I can prove it) has helped the world immensly most of the greatest minds and greatest inventors where christians... Such Da Vinci, Isaac Newton, Blaise Pascal, Lord Kelvin, Gregor Mendel... I could make list if you want...
P.S. If you want to talk about evolution message to me...

2007-07-06 14:52:21 · answer #10 · answered by Vuk Bronkovic 3 · 3 4

fedest.com, questions and answers