To think that religous education should be complusory for EVERYONE

[ReallyTired]

I think that everyone should learn about ALL the major relgions in the world, whether they are Christian, Muslim, Buddist, Hindu, or Athesist or agnostic.

However I think that religous education should be taught as "This is what Christians believe" rather than "This is what WE believe". Children should not be subjected to attempts to convert them to different relgions, but they need to understand and tolerate difference. Ie. Learn that there are times that we should agree to disagree.

A basic knowledge of the five world's major relgions helps children understand current affairs, history and avoid offending people from other cultures to themselves.

If parents want their children brought up as a Christian, Muslim, athesist or pagan then they can take their children to church/ Temple/ Mosque out of school hours.

I like the assemblies at the the special school I work at. They have no relgious songs, but the school has fun singing pop songs. Although the songs are non religous they have lyrics encouraging good behaviour.
All the children are included and gain from the experience.

but the more i learn that i detest the more i want to find reaons to understand it

even the moast silly things- like the Law of Manu wherre it says you must noyt marry a red headed woman- ???? *(not that it was silly in a faith where being unmarried could lead to strarvation).

And of course to aid the people who still suffer fom such stipulations (eg the Sudra/ Dallitr / untouchable castes) then it has to be tackled from a perspective where at least there is understanding if not liking.

Ms Demeanor - Who is this Silas person whose website you have cut and pasted, commentary and all? Just wondering if he is a credible source.

Slaves were fair game for rape, not only in the Arab peninsula, but everywhere. Less than a century ago, in North America, for example.

I'm not sure if we can singularly blame Mohammad for this, though.

Actually thats a good point cote.

And religion contributed vastly to the end of trrans atlantic slaveryt (as well as start up- I can post an enture dissertation on that ).

Well, I'm not 'blaming' Mohammed. You see, the Koran is supposed to come directly from Allah. And Allah is supposed to be immortal and beyond time, so Allah's morality can be judged alongside ours and out of context, because to believers Allah isn't medieval, he's immortal, invisible and god only wise ,as they say. So if he is wrong now, he was wrong then. Which opens up a whole box of frogs, don't you think? Just because slaves were commonly available for rape and torture in history cannot make it good, can it? Or do you think it could?
I said quite clearly this was off the internet. Can any contradict it?

Had another search, and it seems crystal clear that Mohammed had slaves, made slaves of captives, and raped slaves.

im not going to go search it but an excellent place to search for religious texts (of many and sparkling variety!) is the sacred texts website here

greyriverside - I wish you would spend a bit less time on trying to sound witty ('7-foot banana', indeed) and a bit more time trying to understand what I wrote.

Let's try again:

(1) I Do Not Believe In God or anything else that has no proof

Still, having studied some mathematics, including probability, I know that:

(2) Lack of proof does not mean zero (or even low) probability. Something happens or doesn't. Whether or not you saw it happen has no bearing on probability of the event.

If you still don't get it, ask UQD. He understood what I said.

I'm curious, how does being an athetist and having acess to the internet make you an expert on world relgions.

People like Peachy or Scaryteacher are a good position to explain Islam because they have studied several World Religions including Islam to degree level.

I have never had the time to study other religions, but I think its important understanding what makes other human beings tick. Some of the other posters seem to have very strange misconceptions about various groups of people.

Ms Demeanor - My opinion of course is that there is no God and as such, Quran wasn't written by any such deity.

I thought you were holding Mohammad singularly responsible for the sexual fate of slaves because you said "Surely this man's so called teaching is not suitable for young children?"

OK, so I've missed loads of this, and I'm certainly not getting into the Mohammed stuff.

All the Hitler and Stalin examples show is that you can be an evil bastard regardless of whether you believe in an imaginary friend. Having religion doesn't stop you, and being an atheist doesn't make you. And vice-versa.

I love Greyriverside's 7ft tall banana playing "abide with me" on the ukelele. I almost wish it existed so I could see it.

Reallytired, please spell "atheist" properly. You've done it several times so it can't be a mere typo. It looks as if you are trying to write "aesthete", or possibly "anaesthetist". (Apologies in advance if you are dyslexic or something.)

CotedAzur - I did understand your point about mathematical probability, but I still don't think it's necessarily helpful here - see my World Cup/Trinidad & Tobago example.

Greyriverside. It is perfectly possible - while having no faith oneself - to view religious belief a projection of human desire and the attempt to make sense of consciousness, without contemptuously reducing the beliefs of billions to those of children with "imaginary friends". You sound like my nephew. Are you 12 too?

There should have been an "as" in there somewhere. And perhaps not the are you 12 comment. But jesus, really. We can do better than this for a debate.

So are all the millions of people who feel they have a relationship with god not counted towards evidence? It is a lot of people.
If there is no god then there is alot of evidence that a large percentage of human beings are totally deluded then.

Well, no. It's not evidence.

I figure those with a religious faith don't need evidence ("happy are those who have not seen and yet believe" and all that).

And those who don't are pretty satisfied that there is none.

So what's all the bitching about?

Problem is, rosylily, once you start admitting subjective personal experience and anecdote as evidence, you're on a slippery slope.

There's no objective evidence that these people are all talking about the same thing at all, or that the "relationship" exists anywhere other than in their own minds (seeing as we can't interrogate the other party).

And in previous millennia, people had an unwavering belief in Thor, Apollo and Ra. We now accept that they are mythical, do we not? Just as the Christian God will one day be seen to be.

CoteDAzur, I understand about the probability thing, but if that's all you mean it's not applicable to this discussion. If you try to apply it and suggest that it's 50/50 if god exists I will bring out another 7ft banana. I hope it was amusing (I don't see why we can't have some fun in between), but it was also meant to illustrate a serious point.

IorekByrnison, I know what you mean. It would be possible to stand silently. Awed by mankind's deeply spiritual and uplifting attempt to understand those mysteries of life which are currently beyond our science.

Sadly what people actually do is make up an imaginary friend with sick habits and then try and force him onto the rest of us and demand that we 'respect' him. I'll humour a child and sit somewhere else if they have a pretend friend sitting there, but I won't humour supposedly mature people who should know better.

Grey - You still don't get it. Ask UQD or someone else who understood. Sorry, I can't do this anymore.

Trust me, it's applicable, it's valid, and it's correct.

Rosylily - Read 'Extraordinary Delusions and the Madness of Crowds' by Charles Mackay. Old but very interesting book. You will never again think lots of people believing in something is evidence of anything.

Millions believed in flat earth. That didn't work out too well for them, did it?

...and its 50/50 that god exists? Sorry, but no. Not unless you are willing to say the 7ft banana is 50/50 too so that anyone reading this later will realise that you're not speaking of the real world

It's not a 50-50 likelihood, which is what prompted Dawkins to create his 7-point "sliding scale" of likelihood.

You could argue that it's a 50-50 mathematical probability, but it's meaningless.

It's like Trinidad and Tobago's football team playing Brazil and being told they have a 50-50 mathematical probability of winning. They have, but we all know that there's a 99.99% chance of their being slaughtered.

Who said there is 50% chance God exists?

I didn't mean the people believing in a religion I meant the people who feel god's presence.

It seems that we have always been trying to define god since the word go and of course it is impossible to fully understand something that (supposing it exists) is infinite.

'Sadly what people actually do is make up an imaginary friend with sick habits and then try and force him onto the rest of us and demand that we 'respect' him. I'll humour a child and sit somewhere else if they have a pretend friend sitting there, but I won't humour supposedly mature people who should know better. '

some.

and i totally agree about those people.

equally there are people who get on quietly with their faiths and do good. Quakers, as an example (most anyhow). I may or may not be able to share their beliefs but I respect their right to them.

UQD totally agree there's no evidence for religious experiences being the same- but equally all religious experiences could be the same and the name applied to it- god allah, krishna, mahavira, thor, - be the differing factor?
Of cpurse, we dont know. We never will. Unless of curse we get it wrong I guess, then its too late.

rosy - yes, but what does that mean? Feel god's presence. These expressions are like knitting fog.

there are the beliefs then there is prayer and when people pray they feel god's presence. Maybe that is a delusion but an awful lot of people have that 'delusion' so maybe it's real?
I'd say there's at least a 50/50 chance that it is