Comments on: Response to LBBP http://evangelicalatheist.com/2005/08/26/response-to-lbbp/ Helping Mankind Overcome Religion Wed, 20 Aug 2008 09:30:43 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 By: LBBP http://evangelicalatheist.com/2005/08/26/response-to-lbbp/#comment-1261 LBBP Thu, 01 Sep 2005 17:06:46 +0000 http://evangelicalatheist.com/2005/08/26/response-to-lbbp/#comment-1261 "Engaging in dangerous activity (like driving) while under the influence of alcohol is illegal. Unfortunately, it’s legal to be a politician while under the influence of religious fundamentalism." I really like that quote. You both make an interesting point about the relative merits of extremism. Without extremists in the equal rights movement this country might still have segregated busses. Without the extremists amongst the colonists this country might still be a British state. Sweeping change without extremism is rarely possible. Conversely, peace is rarely possible where there are there are radically opposing viewpoints that are trying to coexist in the same space.

“Engaging in dangerous activity (like driving) while under the influence of alcohol is illegal. Unfortunately, it’s legal to be a politician while under the influence of religious fundamentalism.”

I really like that quote.

You both make an interesting point about the relative merits of extremism. Without extremists in the equal rights movement this country might still have segregated busses. Without the extremists amongst the colonists this country might still be a British state. Sweeping change without extremism is rarely possible.

Conversely, peace is rarely possible where there are there are radically opposing viewpoints that are trying to coexist in the same space.

]]> By: I Am http://evangelicalatheist.com/2005/08/26/response-to-lbbp/#comment-1229 I Am Wed, 31 Aug 2005 02:46:31 +0000 http://evangelicalatheist.com/2005/08/26/response-to-lbbp/#comment-1229 Chad: I'm not sure I agree that all extremes are necessarily bad, but I'll take it at face value for now. Let me specifically deal with your example of alcoholism, because I think it's a poor analogy. The differences between alcoholism and religious fundamentalism are as follows: 1. Alcohol exists. 2. Most of the damage done by alcoholics is to themselves. 3. The external damage done by alcoholics is almost never intentional. 4. Alcoholics don't want to change the way I live my life. 5. An alcoholic can cause a serious car accident. Religion is responsible for the Crusades, the Inquisition, the French Wars of Religion, etc. To start to reach the same death tolls, we'd have to start hiring alcoholics as air traffic controllers. 6. Engaging in dangerous activity (like driving) while under the influence of alcohol is illegal. Unfortunately, it's legal to be a politician while under the influence of religious fundamentalism.

Chad:
I’m not sure I agree that all extremes are necessarily bad, but I’ll take it at face value for now. Let me specifically deal with your example of alcoholism, because I think it’s a poor analogy. The differences between alcoholism and religious fundamentalism are as follows:

1. Alcohol exists.

2. Most of the damage done by alcoholics is to themselves.

3. The external damage done by alcoholics is almost never intentional.

4. Alcoholics don’t want to change the way I live my life.

5. An alcoholic can cause a serious car accident. Religion is responsible for the Crusades, the Inquisition, the French Wars of Religion, etc. To start to reach the same death tolls, we’d have to start hiring alcoholics as air traffic controllers.

6. Engaging in dangerous activity (like driving) while under the influence of alcohol is illegal. Unfortunately, it’s legal to be a politician while under the influence of religious fundamentalism.

]]> By: Chad http://evangelicalatheist.com/2005/08/26/response-to-lbbp/#comment-1217 Chad Tue, 30 Aug 2005 14:45:51 +0000 http://evangelicalatheist.com/2005/08/26/response-to-lbbp/#comment-1217 Not to push buttons here again :-) But I wonder about the logic behind your concluding sentence: "On the final point any religion can, and eventually will, spawn fundamentalism. Eliminating the source is the only solution." It seems to me that fundamentalism is akin to any other view taken in the extreme. Extremes are bad and dangerous, period. Whether it is in politics (fringe L or R) or religion (fundies) or anti-religion (persecutors of believers), it should be at the least be discouraged/marginalized. However, the mere existence of an extreme fringe of fundamentalism within those who adhere to religion should not dictate the need for eliminating religion any more than the existence of alcoholics should dictate the need for legislating prohibition.

Not to push buttons here again :-) But I wonder about the logic behind your concluding sentence:

“On the final point any religion can, and eventually will, spawn fundamentalism. Eliminating the source is the only solution.”

It seems to me that fundamentalism is akin to any other view taken in the extreme. Extremes are bad and dangerous, period. Whether it is in politics (fringe L or R) or religion (fundies) or anti-religion (persecutors of believers), it should be at the least be discouraged/marginalized. However, the mere existence of an extreme fringe of fundamentalism within those who adhere to religion should not dictate the need for eliminating religion any more than the existence of alcoholics should dictate the need for legislating prohibition.

]]> By: Gun Of Sod http://evangelicalatheist.com/2005/08/26/response-to-lbbp/#comment-1187 Gun Of Sod Mon, 29 Aug 2005 00:51:24 +0000 http://evangelicalatheist.com/2005/08/26/response-to-lbbp/#comment-1187 Hiya, just read your response, and it seems like you have a very similar non-belief to my own. I found these couple of articles recently which seem to pertain to a couple of areas of interest you mentioned. Enjoy Religious belief 'falling faster than church attendance' http://news.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/08/17/nrelig17.xml 'God gene' discovered by scientist behind gay DNA theory http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/11/14/ngod14.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/11/14/ixnewstop.html

Hiya, just read your response, and it seems like you have a very similar non-belief to my own. I found these couple of articles recently which seem to pertain to a couple of areas of interest you mentioned. Enjoy

Religious belief ‘falling faster than church attendance’
http://news.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/08/17/nrelig17.xml

‘God gene’ discovered by scientist behind gay DNA theory
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/11/14/ngod14.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/11/14/ixnewstop.html

]]> By: Aeger http://evangelicalatheist.com/2005/08/26/response-to-lbbp/#comment-1186 Aeger Sun, 28 Aug 2005 20:10:30 +0000 http://evangelicalatheist.com/2005/08/26/response-to-lbbp/#comment-1186 Indeed, people can be such dicks sometimes, like god.

Indeed, people can be such dicks sometimes, like god.

]]>