Light sensors cause religious row

[OldLadyKnowsNothing]

Story here.

Maybe they should just move?

"if a believer were to believe in God merely to fill in the gaps, they wouldn't be a person of faith."

See now. This is where I have something to say - in between giving the kids alcohol poisoning.

I am a proud supporter of Manchester City. I know I do not do it to 'fill in the gaps', I do it because it is the only right and proper thing to do. Doing so fills me with pride, love, and sometimes, an oceanic feeling of oneness with... stuff. I have been known to practice observances that are meaningful and symbolic to me and others and I pray regularly for them.

I believe I have always known this. And I grudgingly respect the similar feelings of others to feel the same about, say, Manchester United. Even though I know they are wrong in their beliefs.

And it was ever so.

You will think I am mocking (and actually, I'm not, but I am allegorizing, if that's a word).

Because my metanarrative is society. Reductionist, perhaps. I learnt it this way, however it feels (the problem of agency). Social facts exist and sustain, as Durkheim said, outside of consciousness.

Marx, of course, said the same about class consciousness. The evidence that belief in divinity was ever so only confirms my humanist sociological reductionism: yup, societies find it easiest to explain problems of theodicy in terms of things we can't see. As, in fact, does science.

And despite that, it still feels pretty bloody meaningful to believers. Not just feels, is.

And for that reason, I respect people's right to belief and faith, because I think social structures are valuable and meaningful. But I would still explain them in Englightenment terms, as someone else said earlier in the thread. Kant asked us to use knowledge to free ourselves from being dominated. I happen to think that a universalistic atheistic knowledge (in general, not just scientific) is valuable for those reasons.

Ah, but rhubarb, all the questions raised by religion are then instantly answered by it.

Q) The duck-billed platypus - WTF?
A) God did it.

Now, you could go on to philosophise that God clearly advocates the use of mind-altering substances, and piss off the Methodists... but I'll save that for my book

Phew. Thought I'd killed the thread again there Beastie.

I'll get my coat.

Lupus, I would broadly agree with you - except that I may be slightly less exclusively committed to those Enlightenment terms, and to "universalistic atheistic knowledge". I agree that when dealing with the issues of pluralism/multi-culturalism, a neutral platform is what is needed, and an Enlightenment humanist position seems to be the closest thing we've got to that. I'm not absolutely sure that a belief in God precludes that though.

(Also I find the whole football thing utterly incomprehensible )

Here's what I don't understand. Why has this turned into such a disrespectful thread

I was raised Catholic and went to a Catholic all girls school. The nuns were actually ex communicated as they wanted to work in the community and refused to wear a habit. Anyway, it was very much an inclusive inter faith school. We did old testament one year, new testament the next year and then world religions.

As a result, feel that I have an appreciation of people's faiths. I may not agree with them, but would never insult or challenge another's faith.

Yes, debate, query, but feel it's wrong when people are having to defend their religion.

The other issue is that religious tolerance means allowing someone to practice their religion, otherwise it's lip service. This isn't just an act of omission, i.e. doing nothing, but actively doing something to ensure that they are able to fulfill their spiritual obligations.

I don't understand why some posters are so antagonistic about this concept.

Onager - Are you a man?
Unquietdad - Are you a short man?

Because it often means imposing part of that faith on the rest of us. I wouldn't mind at all what people believed in if it didn't affect me, but it does.

I'm a man yes. I changed my name to GrandadOnager for a bit after the silly MEN thread, but it looks daft so I changed it back.

Affects you how?

I did think it had moved away a bit from disrespect, and was mostly in the spirit of open and interested debate. Somewhat.

Is it disrespectful to questions someone's beliefs? I have lived for years with Londoners Utd fans questioning my loyalty to and belief in Sky Blue. 'Why' they whine 'do you believe in something so barren and unrewarding, when you could join us over here where it is warm and shiny from the glow of silver?'. Nope. I'll stay here and sulk. But I don't feel disrespected because of it.

Mocking and being offensive and calling names and sometimes going a bit too far with ones rebuttals isn't respect. But why is asking questions and wanting decent answers disrespectful?

"Affects you how?"

ilovemydogandmrobama, how much time do you have?

Members of one church have the divine right to sit in the house of lords and help rule my supposedly democratic country.

All state schools are required to have an act of worship

People come to my door to tell me that I and my kids are going to be tortured for eternity by their god if I do not do as they say.

I have free speech as long it doesn't bother anyone who belongs to a large church with lots of money.

Churches are doing their best to spread AIDs in developing countries by forbidding the use of condoms and condemning thousands or millions to death.

A church is protecting and supporting child abusers and spiriting them away to avoid detection/prosecution.

In more subtler ways I believe that the world could be much improved if people were not told that this world doesn't really matter and it's all about earning points to get into heaven.

That's the short version

Message withdrawn

Bloss, the desire to believe doesn't require evidence just like the desire to hear music.
but if you want me to buy music from you then offering me an empty CD case and saying "it is in there, you just have to believe" isn't gonna work

What is the right way to live? Are you happy for me, or anyone, to have my own answer to that?

I don't think it's enough, I'm afraid. The ways of living are too many and too complex, in the name of different religions. I know the case has been made that we should assess each case on its merits but religion doesn't.

And music is amenable to all kinds of scientific tests. Perhaps not the reasons we might like or be moved by it. But then those are human and social and emotional constructs.

Am I being unreasonable to believe this thread would have been more interesting and respectful were it not for the two pricks men on this thread?

i'd just like to interrupt the philosophical debate to ask UnquietDad whether....

(a) he is always so rude to people he has never "spoken" to.

(b) he has difficulty distinguishing between bluntness and downright rudeness in rl.

(c) he adopts the same hectoring strident tone when "discussing" things with his male friends.

unquietdad your response to me was bloody rude!

"do all you "religion = superstition = nonsense and therefore it's fine to treat it with ridicule and with scorn" lobby have no imaginative or spiritual lives? are your lives all 100% concrete and factual?? if so, poor you."

Controlfreaky, if you meant this one, I didn't think UQD was rude in response to what was actually a pretty rude question.

Swedes, thank you.

You have done me a service since people were saying that only the religious have to put up with this kind of abuse and you have demonstrated that is not the case.

I hope no one thinks I put you up to it.

Swedes, that's not exactly respectful now, is it?

Onager - Well it's a start that you acknowledge what you've done as abuse.

"Poor try, Rhubarb! You can do better than that!"

"controlfreaky - can't believe you are dragging up the cracked old chestnut about "not having a religion means you have no imagination." Shame on you. Poor. Too poor even to dismiss."

if you think what i posted is rude compared to the tone of ud's response then all i can say is you really aren't very imaginative....

controlfreakythecontrolfreak, may I ask in response to your earlier question if the only non-materialistic thoughts and feelings you have are religious? no music, no art and no love outside of the bible?

Tell me when you come up in Australia, Swedes