Total Posts:12|Showing Posts:1-12
Jump to topic:

Why don't fanatics genocide humans?

Jovian
Posts: 1,720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2015 5:29:57 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
I've seen countless of religious fanatics (no, I didn't say every religious person) now telling how much humans are filthy creatures who aren't more worth than the dirt of the antennas of a cockroach and that they do not deserve to have fun. What prevents these people really from executing their hatred and genocide humans?

If they hate humans this much, it doesn't make sense at all that they don't just start doing this.
Jovian
Posts: 1,720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2015 8:14:37 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
Oh no, don't try to dodge this one, peeps. I think you have quite much to say about this, given some of you actually see humanity as this. Bump.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2015 8:59:42 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/16/2015 8:14:37 PM, Jovian wrote:
Oh no, don't try to dodge this one, peeps. I think you have quite much to say about this, given some of you actually see humanity as this. Bump.

You're asking why has the thread for three hours ignored your fatuous strawman premise leading to a wildly fanciful and deliberately provocative conclusion?

I'd suggest that nobody feels intrigued by the fatuous strawman premise.

You need to at least get the premise right, Jovian.

Most religion doesn't seek humanity's destruction.

It seeks humanity's control.

Start there and instead of asking why doesn't religion routinely support the genocide of a species, ask instead why it doesn't routinely oppose science, democracy, freedom of speech, independent inquiry, clerical accountability, cultural pluralism, independent media, religious critique and secular government.

Because then members will blink at you and some may say, "Uh... Jove, it does."
Jovian
Posts: 1,720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2015 9:08:44 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/16/2015 8:59:42 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 12/16/2015 8:14:37 PM, Jovian wrote:
Oh no, don't try to dodge this one, peeps. I think you have quite much to say about this, given some of you actually see humanity as this. Bump.

You're asking why has the thread for three hours ignored your fatuous strawman premise leading to a wildly fanciful and deliberately provocative conclusion?

I'd suggest that nobody feels intrigued by the fatuous strawman premise.

You need to at least get the premise right, Jovian.

Most religion doesn't seek humanity's destruction.

It seeks humanity's control.

Start there and instead of asking why doesn't religion routinely support the genocide of a species, ask instead why it doesn't routinely oppose science, democracy, freedom of speech, independent inquiry, clerical accountability, cultural pluralism, independent media, religious critique and secular government.

Because then members will blink at you and some may say, "Uh... Jove, it does."

You have a point, but the thing is that there seems to be an indeed deep-rooted thing in at least some Christian denominations that humanity is a real stinking and utterly filthy piece of crap. The crime: they have solely been born. I strongly beg to differ about this talk.

These rhetorics seem almost like they are copied from a genocidal dictator, and they just annoy me to the maximum, when people have this kind of view upon humans, because it isn't true.

The thoughts go directly to aliens in movies who want to exterminate humans, I really can't see any difference between these two sides.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2015 9:22:35 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/16/2015 9:08:44 PM, Jovian wrote:
At 12/16/2015 8:59:42 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 12/16/2015 8:14:37 PM, Jovian wrote:
Oh no, don't try to dodge this one, peeps. I think you have quite much to say about this, given some of you actually see humanity as this. Bump.

You're asking why has the thread for three hours ignored your fatuous strawman premise leading to a wildly fanciful and deliberately provocative conclusion?

I'd suggest that nobody feels intrigued by the fatuous strawman premise.

You need to at least get the premise right, Jovian.

Most religion doesn't seek humanity's destruction.

It seeks humanity's control.

Start there and instead of asking why doesn't religion routinely support the genocide of a species, ask instead why it doesn't routinely oppose science, democracy, freedom of speech, independent inquiry, clerical accountability, cultural pluralism, independent media, religious critique and secular government.

Because then members will blink at you and some may say, "Uh... Jove, it does."

You have a point, but the thing is that there seems to be an indeed deep-rooted thing in at least some Christian denominations that humanity is a real stinking and utterly filthy piece of crap. The crime: they have solely been born. I strongly beg to differ about this talk.

These rhetorics seem almost like they are copied from a genocidal dictator, and they just annoy me to the maximum, when people have this kind of view upon humans, because it isn't true.

The thoughts go directly to aliens in movies who want to exterminate humans, I really can't see any difference between these two sides.

The top three world faiths -- Christianity, Islam and Hinduism -- are all millennial in nature, meaning that they predict the destruction of humanity as a planned and inevitable act of divine will. However, whether adherents relish the prospect or dread it really depends on the adherents and their specific traditions. Ancient faiths tend to schism repeatedly and develop their own disparate moralities. A single religious tradition can spawn both progressive humanists and reactionary death-cults -- and even more confusingly, a sect that is one thing in one century can mutate and become something else a century or two later.

The real issue here isn't what is believed, because bad ideas can be replaced. The issue is how bad ideas are defended. Religion has a long tradition of defending good and bad ideas blindly, indiscriminately and unaccountably, often with punitive nationalistic zeal.

That's disturbing, no matter what the bad ideas might be.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2015 9:37:00 PM
Posted: 12 months ago
At 12/16/2015 8:14:37 PM, Jovian wrote:
Oh no, don't try to dodge this one, peeps. I think you have quite much to say about this, given some of you actually see humanity as this. Bump.

The genocide doesn't happen until after the rapture.
Jovian
Posts: 1,720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2015 8:28:24 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/16/2015 9:37:00 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/16/2015 8:14:37 PM, Jovian wrote:
Oh no, don't try to dodge this one, peeps. I think you have quite much to say about this, given some of you actually see humanity as this. Bump.

The genocide doesn't happen until after the rapture.

Yeah true but that much human hating as many fanatics are, one would think that it wouldn't be any problem for them to do this already now.
Philocat
Posts: 728
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2015 8:53:44 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
Huh? Why do you think religion hates humans?

If anything, it is the atheist, liberal eco-warriors who would most like to see a genocide. I have seen many of these people claim that humans are a blight on this planet and that it would be a lot better if we all died off. They also like to say that it would be a good thing if there was a massive war, which would achieve the supposedly desirable aim of population control.
Jovian
Posts: 1,720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2015 10:23:34 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/18/2015 8:53:44 PM, Philocat wrote:
Huh? Why do you think religion hates humans?

I wrote in the OP. Religions have for years and years taught people that they are filthy little worthless creatures, only by being born.

If anything, it is the atheist, liberal eco-warriors who would most like to see a genocide. I have seen many of these people claim that humans are a blight on this planet and that it would be a lot better if we all died off.

That is a common opinion among many people, and this is just as bad. However, there is nothing in the ideology of atheism which says that humans are filthy and worthless creatures because they like to have fun, and that humans should do nothing but mentally whip themselves. Nor have I seen this thing coming out of the mouth of prominent atheists like Richard Dawkins or Christopher Hitchens.

They also like to say that it would be a good thing if there was a massive war, which would achieve the supposedly desirable aim of population control.

They? I have not seen a single atheist who has said this. Not from people like Dawkins or Hitchens either. You would have to show me where some of them say this. However, idiots exist in all kinds of camps.
Philocat
Posts: 728
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2015 7:29:31 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/18/2015 10:23:34 PM, Jovian wrote:
At 12/18/2015 8:53:44 PM, Philocat wrote:
Huh? Why do you think religion hates humans?

I wrote in the OP. Religions have for years and years taught people that they are filthy little worthless creatures, only by being born.

Would you mind substantiating that view? I'm sure you have your sources for making that claim, and we would be much better off discussing this issue if all our reasons are laid out on the table.

It seems to me that most religions actually have a very humanistic point of view. For example, in Judaism it is written in Genesis that man is made in the image of God.
In Christianity, Jesus himself was human (do you not think that it would be odd for God to be incarnate in the form of man if he hated humans?)

I suspect a similar respect for human life is present in Islam, Hinduism, Sikhism and Buddhism, although I'm afraid I do not know enough about these religions to pass comment.


If anything, it is the atheist, liberal eco-warriors who would most like to see a genocide. I have seen many of these people claim that humans are a blight on this planet and that it would be a lot better if we all died off.

That is a common opinion among many people, and this is just as bad. However, there is nothing in the ideology of atheism which says that humans are filthy and worthless creatures because they like to have fun, and that humans should do nothing but mentally whip themselves. Nor have I seen this thing coming out of the mouth of prominent atheists like Richard Dawkins or Christopher Hitchens.

They also like to say that it would be a good thing if there was a massive war, which would achieve the supposedly desirable aim of population control.

They? I have not seen a single atheist who has said this. Not from people like Dawkins or Hitchens either. You would have to show me where some of them say this. However, idiots exist in all kinds of camps.

I wasn't saying that anti-human rhetoric was an atheist viewpoint, I was pointing out that there are some people, who tend to be atheists, who think that humanity is a bad thing. The main group of people that voices anti-human views are actually radical environmentalists (http://www.cfact.org...), who coincidentally tend to be atheists.
Jovian
Posts: 1,720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2015 7:54:28 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/19/2015 7:29:31 PM, Philocat wrote:
At 12/18/2015 10:23:34 PM, Jovian wrote:
At 12/18/2015 8:53:44 PM, Philocat wrote:
Huh? Why do you think religion hates humans?

I wrote in the OP. Religions have for years and years taught people that they are filthy little worthless creatures, only by being born.

Would you mind substantiating that view? I'm sure you have your sources for making that claim, and we would be much better off discussing this issue if all our reasons are laid out on the table.

It's a quite well-established fact that the churches told their people back in the days that they were filthy pieces of sh1t. I don't think you need a source for that. Today however we see lots of humanist people who choose another interpretation of religion for expressing their humanism.

And the fact that some Christians believe that you are born into sin is quite well-established too. But I'm not. Why should me and you be punished for what some dude allegedly did 6000 years ago? If one believes that, then one should also justify Kim Jong Un's incarceration of a criminal's two upcoming generations. This North Korean thing is a drop in the ocean compared with the born-into-sin-thing.

It seems to me that most religions actually have a very humanistic point of view. For example, in Judaism it is written in Genesis that man is made in the image of God.

Ironically though, Judaism has the Tikkun Olam (repair the world) thing. Why should the world be repaired if there are 7 billion God clones on Earth?

In Christianity, Jesus himself was human (do you not think that it would be odd for God to be incarnate in the form of man if he hated humans?)

I don't know whether God himself has said in the Bible that humans are filthy creatures but we hear that from religious fanatics.

I suspect a similar respect for human life is present in Islam, Hinduism, Sikhism and Buddhism, although I'm afraid I do not know enough about these religions to pass comment.

Ditto.


If anything, it is the atheist, liberal eco-warriors who would most like to see a genocide. I have seen many of these people claim that humans are a blight on this planet and that it would be a lot better if we all died off.

That is a common opinion among many people, and this is just as bad. However, there is nothing in the ideology of atheism which says that humans are filthy and worthless creatures because they like to have fun, and that humans should do nothing but mentally whip themselves. Nor have I seen this thing coming out of the mouth of prominent atheists like Richard Dawkins or Christopher Hitchens.

They also like to say that it would be a good thing if there was a massive war, which would achieve the supposedly desirable aim of population control.

They? I have not seen a single atheist who has said this. Not from people like Dawkins or Hitchens either. You would have to show me where some of them say this. However, idiots exist in all kinds of camps.

I wasn't saying that anti-human rhetoric was an atheist viewpoint, I was pointing out that there are some people, who tend to be atheists, who think that humanity is a bad thing. The main group of people that voices anti-human views are actually radical environmentalists (http://www.cfact.org...), who coincidentally tend to be atheists.

Ah, I didn't knew that. Well, it would be quite weird to be a radical environmentalist without thinking that, since humanity causes climate changes. Doesn't mean we can't change that though.
Philocat
Posts: 728
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2015 11:58:07 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/19/2015 7:54:28 PM, Jovian wrote:
At 12/19/2015 7:29:31 PM, Philocat wrote:
At 12/18/2015 10:23:34 PM, Jovian wrote:
At 12/18/2015 8:53:44 PM, Philocat wrote:
Huh? Why do you think religion hates humans?

I wrote in the OP. Religions have for years and years taught people that they are filthy little worthless creatures, only by being born.

Would you mind substantiating that view? I'm sure you have your sources for making that claim, and we would be much better off discussing this issue if all our reasons are laid out on the table.

It's a quite well-established fact that the churches told their people back in the days that they were filthy pieces of sh1t. I don't think you need a source for that. Today however we see lots of humanist people who choose another interpretation of religion for expressing their humanism.

That may well be your interpretation of past Church teachings. To establish whether it is a fact, you must present the teachings from which you have taken your interpretation.

You may have interpreted a certain teaching to mean that humans were 'filthy pieces of sh1t', but I would posit alternative interpretations. In other words, I don't believe that it is an established fact that religions have said that humans are bad.

And the fact that some Christians believe that you are born into sin is quite well-established too. But I'm not. Why should me and you be punished for what some dude allegedly did 6000 years ago? If one believes that, then one should also justify Kim Jong Un's incarceration of a criminal's two upcoming generations. This North Korean thing is a drop in the ocean compared with the born-into-sin-thing.

Original sin is not an actual sin that everyone has done. It doesn't make sense for someone to go into the confessional box and confess that they have committed an original sin.

Biblically, original sin is the name given to the very first sin committed by Adam and Eve. If we take the creation story metaphorically (as I believe we should), then this sin represents man's natural inclination to sin.

It is this inclination that is original sin.

Therefore, even if original sin isn't a sin itself, it causes everyone to be sinful to some degree or another. We all have an inclination to be sinful, this is fundamental to human nature. This explains why there is no person who doesn't sin.

To summarise, original sin isn't a sin itself, it is the inclination to sin that all human's possess.


It seems to me that most religions actually have a very humanistic point of view. For example, in Judaism it is written in Genesis that man is made in the image of God.

Ironically though, Judaism has the Tikkun Olam (repair the world) thing. Why should the world be repaired if there are 7 billion God clones on Earth?

Adam and Eve were made in the image of God, but they were not made in the likeness of God.
What does this mean?

To be made in the image of God is to be made so that one has the capacity to become God-like, if they live good lives, atone for sins and embrace holiness.
To be made in the likeness of God it to be made so that one is actually God-like. This would be a so-called 'God clone'.

Therefore man is made so that he has the capacity to become God-like, but right now he is not God-like because of various flaws that are essential to human nature. The 'Tikkun Olam' in Judaism simply states that we can improve the world through acts of kindness and, in the process, become more God-like in the process. In other words, it is a journey to fulfil our capacity to become like God.


In Christianity, Jesus himself was human (do you not think that it would be odd for God to be incarnate in the form of man if he hated humans?)

I don't know whether God himself has said in the Bible that humans are filthy creatures but we hear that from religious fanatics.

Do you have quotes? If so, I would be very interested in seeing them.


I suspect a similar respect for human life is present in Islam, Hinduism, Sikhism and Buddhism, although I'm afraid I do not know enough about these religions to pass comment.

Ditto.


If anything, it is the atheist, liberal eco-warriors who would most like to see a genocide. I have seen many of these people claim that humans are a blight on this planet and that it would be a lot better if we all died off.

That is a common opinion among many people, and this is just as bad. However, there is nothing in the ideology of atheism which says that humans are filthy and worthless creatures because they like to have fun, and that humans should do nothing but mentally whip themselves. Nor have I seen this thing coming out of the mouth of prominent atheists like Richard Dawkins or Christopher Hitchens.

They also like to say that it would be a good thing if there was a massive war, which would achieve the supposedly desirable aim of population control.

They? I have not seen a single atheist who has said this. Not from people like Dawkins or Hitchens either. You would have to show me where some of them say this. However, idiots exist in all kinds of camps.

I wasn't saying that anti-human rhetoric was an atheist viewpoint, I was pointing out that there are some people, who tend to be atheists, who think that humanity is a bad thing. The main group of people that voices anti-human views are actually radical environmentalists (http://www.cfact.org...), who coincidentally tend to be atheists.

Ah, I didn't knew that. Well, it would be quite weird to be a radical environmentalist without thinking that, since humanity causes climate changes. Doesn't mean we can't change that though.