Why people hate religion

I don't know about some young people but I left the church not my Faith. I am sure most young people are like me.

American Christians follow the Antichrist. If you believe in a literal Antichrist, then so be it. If not, as I don’t, you at least have to admit if you live in the real world that they live in direct opposition to all of Christ’s teachings.

Moral lessons attributed to Jesus Christ preach the golden rule—treat others as you want them to treat you—non judgment, humility, non-hypocrisy, acceptance, generosity, loving neighbors and strangers, understanding that all human beings are God’s children and made of God and therefore should be respected as such.

American Christians preach and enact hatred, hierarchical classification of people according to appearances and geography; they prejudge and judge; they worship gun violence, domestic violence, militarized violence, violence against animals and the planet itself without any respect for “God’s” creations; they take, take, take; they say grace but they have no appreciation for anything given to them and always want more; they adhere to arbitrary rules of behavior but have no appreciation for life and the living; overnight, they abandoned “family values” to worship a man who embodies a literal Antichrist: sloth, gluttony, greed, pride, vengeance, lust, envy at their maximum levels of human expression.

People in the United States who call themselves Christian carry around this magic shield that allows them to use that term to deflect all criticisms that point out the reality that they’re evil. They live evil lives and they worship and promote and advance and breed a destructive culture that is exactly the opposite of what Jesus Christ is said to have taught.

Say what you want, but most Catholics, including the Pope, are not fans of Trump.

R3 I wouldn’t say I “hate” Catholics, but I have great disdain for all members of the Catholic church for not leaving in the wake of the endless revelations about the Catholic organization organizing, promoting and defending child rape. I can’t understand it AT ALL. You can keep the beliefs and the religious practices but abandon the organization and start your own that prohibits violent sexual abuses of children, can’t you? Whether Catholic people say they hate Trump or not, the whole raping-kids thing is a deal breaker for me.

r3 What a low bar that is. And I still can't get married in my country thanks solely to the Catholic Church, so fuck all of them.

R5 It’s an abysmally low bar, and it’s one that not a single practicing Catholic can clear. Hence the disdain.

Seriously. This global organization, as a matter of common practice, historically has raped children and threatened them to keep them quiet. And it still does it. And it won’t apologize in a real way by committing to end it. Despite new revelations almost every week, and despite condemnations, the church keeps protecting these fuckers, shuffling them around the planet and no doubt high fiving them in private for what they’ve done.

And we criticize the Catholic church, but let all Catholic people off the hook.

I ask every single Catholic person I know, regularly, how they can affiliate themselves with and give their money to a global corporation that specializes in raping children. I’ve never received any kind of reasonable answer—it’s always something like, “I know, I know, I can’t believe it! But at least they are working on it!” And I say, “I know, I know, you’re brainwashed and you refuse to look at what they actually do and admit your culpability as a supporter and an underwriter for a group of violent pedophiles. Would you prefer to talk about how vile radical Muslims are now?”

Anti-Catholicism has been ingrained in Anglo-Saxon cultures, particularly the UK and the US for centuries, so the responses here are no surprise. I don't have the time to go into the abuse scandal so I'll just give you the condensed version of how most Catholics view it which basically boils down to - pedophile priests make up just about 1% of the clergy (pew centre figures), why should we leave OUR church because of them? They should be the ones to leave.

Going back to the anti-Catholic theme, Catholicism remains a minority religion in the US with most tending tending to vote liberal, yet some queens here, who were probably raised baptist or evangelical try to look for an excuse to blame the Pope for their miserable childhoods. Meanwhile, Catholic countries like Spain, Belgium and Argentina were legalising gay marriage a decade before the USA. The biggest enemy of gay progress in America remains various protestant denominations that have always wielded much more political power than the Catholic church does in Catholic countries.

[quote]The biggest enemy of gay progress in America remains various protestant denominations that have always wielded much more political power than the Catholic church does in Catholic countries.

You're beyond clueless and you're throwing every Catholic country in the same basket. The Catholic Church funded buses to drive people to the voting booths after the Sunday mass when SSM was being decided TWICE in my country. They succeeded with an even greater margin the second time around, because people listened to the current pope more and took his condemnation to heart more strongly than when Benedict said the same thing. But good for you for thinking this was an aberration; meanwhile, I still can't get fucking married thanks to the child fuckers you're apologising for on a fucking homosexual message board.

Fuck your enabling quisling ass. Too bad I won't see the day your cult led by these evil clueless virgins loses all influence in the western world.

People hate religion because the supernatural is IMAGINARY and the dogme people invented surrounding it is hateful and oppressive. Also: THEISTS ARE MORONS. And it's easy to hate people who are willfully stupid.

[quote]You're beyond clueless and you're throwing every Catholic country in the same basket. The Catholic Church funded buses to drive people to the voting booths after the Sunday mass when SSM was being decided TWICE in my country.

It's impossible to debate you if you don't mention your country. Fact is, of the first 10 countries to allow SSM, 8 were Catholic. Unless you're from Uganda, where the CC is as ultra-conservative as the public, tell us where you're from for context.

Troll thread. It’s a locked article so it can’t be read therefore can’t be discussed and no, I’m not disabling my ad blocker.

There are 424,000 Catholic clergy in the world, according to a basic Google search. If one percent are known pedophiles, then that’s over 4,000 employees of this one organization who are known to rape children. And the church and its affiliate organizations continue to defend and protect these child rapists.

Honest to God—pun intended—I don’t know how people can continue to pay their dues to this organization and turn a blind eye simply because Pew says “only” one percent of those in power rape kids. That’s fucking insane.

To the Catholic defender here: all of the ire is not directed toward the Catholic faith. Much of it is directed toward the Catholic organization and its crimes and its politics—not the faith. Believe what you believe...if you truly believe in the teachings of the faith, then start an offshoot that observes the tenets instead of perverting them.

But no, it’s not only Catholics. A protestant church in my hometown—one with a gigantic “Noah’s ark” installation in front of it, no less, was just shut down because of multiple generations of people who alerted authorities they’d been sexually assaulted (including by family) in the church.

It’s not an issue in most cases of people’s spiritual interests; it’s an issue of abuses of power that emanate from organizations that dictate the ways of the world to naive followers, and especially the most naive and easily overpowered among them.

I've been an atheist since I was ten. Before then, I didn't think about it. Why churches aren't taxed in the U.S. baffles me.

You should read the obituaries of the Southern Baptist deplorables for a chuckle.

Pick a medium-sized city and search "obituaries".

Again, Catholics vote liberal despite their church's issues with abortion, they care about climate change and the environment and call out the orange ogre for what he is. How are they worse than Southern Baptists, Evangelicals, Mormons and other protestants who support a racist agenda?

R16 Also from Pew Research:

—52 percent of Catholics voted for Trump in 2016

—60 percent of white Catholics voted for Trump

A greater share of white Catholics voted for Trump than of protestants, and only one percent more Mormons voted for Trump than white Catholics did.

How can you allege that Catholics “vote liberal”?

I used Pew as a source because you or another Catholic defender who asked for a debate used Pew as a source to say that “only” one percent of Catholic clergy are sex offenders.

When my mother moved to Florida, she and her sister enrolled in the local catholic church’s Bible Study class. There are so many fundamentalists down south who tell Catholics they know nothing about the Bible that Catholic Churches have bible study classes. They’re always taught by priests from India, Africa or South America because there are so few Americans going into the priesthood these days.

I went to catholic gramme4 school until 5th grade and remember the Bible as being like my 50 Famous Fairy Tales book. Instead of a princesse locked in a castle there was a man inside of a whale. In Snow White the Huntsman spares Snow White instead of killing her on the demands of her mother. In the Bible, god told Abraham to kill his son but then made the knife fall from Abraham’s hand, sparing the boy. Lot’s wife turned into a pillar of salt, in Grimms fairytales someone’s brothers turn into geese.

As far as the Jesus stuff was concerned, I kind of thought of Jesus as a good cowboy who rode into a bad town. He got his disciples together and they were kind of like The Magnificent Seven and Jesus was one of the four who were killed.

None of it seemed remotely real but it was entertaining. It was much more fun than the catechism.

R17 I have a Catholic coworker who knows *nothing* about the Bible. I am not attacking Catholics, really, but I find it totally bizarre. She went to Sunday school and she goes to church every week, but she has told me that as a Catholic, she’s actually always been taught not to read the Bible itself at all, because only priests can interpret what the Bible says.

I was raised without church. I’m agnostic/spiritually curious. I took a class on Milton’s Paradise Lost at Cambridge and they told me to read Genesis first and so I did. It all sparked an interest and so I have read a good amount of the Bible, Old and New Testaments, all informally on my own. I was shocked when this devout woman told me that her faith has always taught her not to read the Bible on her own. It made sense of how my Catholic grandmother could attend masses in Latin without knowing any Latin. But my Methodist grandmother read the Bible constantly—her whole life, up to age 94. I thought all Christians do.

Anyway, my colleague has learned a lot about the Bible from me, a non-Christian and a casual reader of sections of the Bible. (Genesis is absolutely bonkers madcap crazy nonsensical—read it if you haven’t!!)

Honestly, the best explanation I ever heard of the Old Testament was in Religion Class at Catholic High School. Our teacher instructed us that the OT was the "Library of the Ancient Jews" and best understood this way. Genesis was a Mythological story- a Religious truth expressed in symbolic litetature and NOT to be taken litetally. Then there were the Legal texts like Leviticus which were written to make clear the rules and coda for the people. Likewise you have books of Poetry ( Song of Songs), Prophecy ( Daniel) and so on. The ancient Jews and Jewish scholars today understand these books in this context, and it is really the modern Christian World especially Far- Right/ Evangelicals that seeks to manipulate and interpret these texts for there own purposes. BTW, if I I *mistakenly* got confused with one or another of the books I apologize- I'm smoking a blunt.

R19 Genesis is a wacked out combination of mythology and genealogy. There are long inventories of who begat whom, and strange narratives that beg questions.

In the beginning, God made everything. Then he was walking, physically, in the garden “enjoying the cool of day.” He was clearly in tiny, humansize physical form inside his own created world with no explanation. Long before Jesus. This needs to be contended with by Christians.

God made “man, male and female, he created them” in the beginning. *Later,* he creates woman. So what the fuck is that about?

And it just gets weirder. Noah builds the arc, the flood happens, afterward he celebrates and passes out drunk. One of his sons comes upon him lying there passed out and naked and covers him with a blanket. Noah wakes up enraged at his son for covering him and curses and banishes him...??!

Early on, God demands that no creature that walks or crawls or swims may be eaten under penalty of death—only plants. Then he decides all men are wicked and he floods the Earth to kill everyone but Noah’s family. After the flood, Noah’s “good” son roasts a goat, and God smells the burning flesh and “it smelled sweet to Him.” So did Noah’s family corrupt God?

And that’s only the first few pages. It is insane.

[quote] but she has told me that as a Catholic, she’s actually always been taught not to read the Bible itself at all, because only priests can interpret what the Bible says.

I was never taught that in catholic school or in Cathechism class when I went to public school and got bused to catholic school on Friday afternoons. (I don’t know if the public school district or the catholic school paid for the bus to take me from public school to catechism on fridays. I think I only got bused until I was confirmed).

We always learned bible stories in catholic school when I went in the early 60s. We had picture books. I remember seeing colored drawings of Moses parting the Red Sea and the Jews all walked through a sort of highway with walls of water and the next picture was of some of the Egyptians partly on the highway but behind them all the Egyptians, chariots and horses were in a giant wave about to crash. Good stuff.

I remember pictures of a pillar of smoke in daytime and a pillar of fire at night leading the Jews out of the desert and into the promised land.

Plus my family had a bible at home. It was gigantic. It was very boring though, because the stories we learned in school were sort of like the Readers Digest condensed version, while the versions in the Bible just went on and on and on about all these people and their sons, and their son’s sons who took a wife named this and a wife named that. Also, the big Bible contained some pretty gruesome stories like putting all the men, women and “little ones” to death by the sword, only sparing virgins to be kidnapped and given to one of the 12 tribes of Israel. A little scary for a kid to read when we’re supposed to think of the Israelites as the good guys.

Religion is a man-made construct. I say this as someone who considers myself nominally Hindu.

If it brings you peace, great.

But all major religions were thousands of years ago what we consider Scientology to be today. Some man (usually) probably took some really strong drugs, went on one hell of a trip and came down saying he found God.

In another 3000 years, what's to say that humanity does not consider the existence of Jesus the same way we consider Zeus, Ares, Osiris, Hecate etc. and there are some 'new' Gods to worship?

R21 She’s from Pennsylvania. I swear she tells me that she has always been told not to read it herself because only priests are qualified to interpret and they give sermons about everything that anyone needs to know. I have asked her if she has never even been curious to read what’s written in the book that defines her life and she said no, she has never thought about it. It’s strange to me because she reads a lot otherwise.

She is VERY well versed in dogma and rules, holy days, etc. All kinds of things that I had never heard of.

Religion is for people who can’t figure things out on their own.

Are you saying the religious are bereft of critical thinking?

R25 A majority of Christians believe that Trump represents Christian virtues of prudence, justice, temperance, courage, faith, hope and charity. In other words, yes.

The OP's article is very good. I'm not going to get into some Catholic vs Evangelical tug of war. I'm Catholic. I don't go to church, or adhere to the doctrine or dogma which I was taught to believe. But I was educated by Franciscan brothers and priests, and my values are the ones with which I was raised. It was my belief in honesty to forced me to come out as gay when I was 18, even though my parents were horrified, at first. The reality is, most of us are raised by our parents in a particular religion, or lack of one. It isn't until we start maturing that we start questioning things and deciding for ourselves. That's one of the reasons I was so angered by the Church's entrenched opposition to same-sex marriage legislation. You can't change your sexual orientation. But you sure as hell can change your religious affiliation: people do it all the time.

Catholics who are looking for a religion that's more accepting of gays tend to switch over to the Episcopal Church, as being the most similar (and the Church even accepts Episcopal services as valid for Catholics). And Episcopalians who think their religion has become too liberal sometimes convert to Catholicism. So people have a way of matching their religion to their social point of view. I think it's all crap. I just wish the IRS would enforce its directives, and prosecute tax-exempt religious organizations that become involved in politics. Or, better yet, remove the churchs' tax exempt status altogether.

The most organized evils done in world history have been done in the name of religion or with the blessing of religion. This is no less true in the modern world.

Those churches would go bankrupt if they lost their tax-exempt status. I can’t speak for the other religions, but Catholic Church attendance gets smaller and smaller every year. All they do is beg for money.

Protestants. Smh.

I also remember a nun drawing a big circle on the blackboard. The circle represent the soul. Then she talked about venial sins. You lied - that’s venial sin. She put a small chalk slash inside the circle. You gossiped about someone. A venial sin. Another small slash in the circle. You talked back to your parents. You disobeyed your parents. You fought with your brother. You swore. All became small slashes in the circle.

If you confessed your sins, the priest gave you penance, which were prayers you had to recite. After you recited the prayers for each sin, your sin was wiped out. She erased some of the slashes. You can’t remember all of your sins, she continued. And you sometimes committed sins that your conscience didn’t recognize - kind of like a blind spot. So there were still some leftover slashes in the circle. If you died suddenly and didn’t get confess those sins and receive the last rites and achieve a “state of grace”, you went to purgatory. Purgatory was an unpleasant place where you suffered a sort of pins and needles sensation until all your sins were erased. One way to have your sins erased was for someone to say prayers for you. Your relatives could recite prayers for you after you died that would lessen your time in purgatory. You could also say prayers for yourself in advance, before you died, and bank those prayers in a kind of spiritual safe deposit box. There were also prayers that could be said “for all the souls in purgatory,” so that someone who died without relatives to pray for them could get some freebie prayers

Different prayers had different powers. A Hail Mary might take 5 days off someone’s sentence in purgatory, while an Our Father was worth maybe 10 days. An apostles creed was a good one. Then there was the one where the names of lots of saints were recited. My mother liked that one. That was one of the best. Of course, the rosary was a was a one-two punch against your sins in purgatory, racking up lots of days to be turned in at the gates of purgatory. Once your sins were compared to your banked prayers at the gates of purgatory, you were either given your sentence in number of days or you went straight on to heaven, having banked enough prayer to cover your remaining sins.

So prayers were like a passbook savings account, tallied up against the debt of your soul’s venial sin checking account.

But.......there was another sin. It was a mortal sin. The nun took her piece of chalk and placed it on its side and shaded the entire soul. A mortal sin could not be erases. She flipped the eraser to its solid side and tried to erase the sin. It didn’t work. You could never rid yourself of a mortal sin. Missing mass on Sunday was a mortal sin. If you were sick, it was ok to miss mass. But if you were only pretending to be sick so you didn’t have to go to mass, god knew. He would put his chalk on its side and cover your immortal soul.

I remember wondering why committing murder had the same effect on your soul as missing mass. It seemed a bit incongruous. But, I knew better than to question a nun. Those blackboard pointers they wielded delivered a painful thwack on the back of the hand, sending shooting stars right up through the nose and out the head, where you could see them.

Religion is the root of all evil.

Honesty I get, including non-hypocrisy. Those make sense to me as soul-enriching and practical tenets.

Sinning regularly and then being absolutely forced to confess your wrongdoings and crimes to individuals who are said to have power over your soul and who are revered and hold power in society—I’m sorry, nut that shows a lack of critical thinking to me.

If there were ever a way to manipulate a society, I’d say the perfect setup would be to make yourself the more ultimately trusted person in that society and then find a way to gather everyone’s secrets. Blackmail. Guilt. Shame. A priest with bad intentions—and we have already discussed that an estimated 1 in every 100 priests is a child rapist, according to Pew—can wield his position like a flaming sword when he has this much control over people. Think about it.

[quote] R28: The most organized evils done in world history have been done in the name of religion or with the blessing of religion. This is no less true in the modern world.

Except for the Fascist horrors of WWII, and many more.

With rare exception, these horrors were all done by men. That’s a better correlation. They all need to be terminated.

Really, R34? You don't see a religious connection between the Nazis and 6 million Jews?

R34 Communists and the Nazis use the template of religious organization and replace the myths with the state. Hitler was worshipped fanatically by Germans, as a sort of surrogate Christ figure. People seem hardwired to follow someone whom they regard to be all powerful, whether that person is alive or mythic. You see it at small scale all the time in industries and at large scale with celebrities. I saw women during the 2015 campaign say, “It’s God and then Jesus and then Trump!” Communism and fascism should be viewed as secular religions because they manipulate masses using the same mechanisms.

The OP cited Evangelicals and Trump — not Catholics. I agree that the most dangerous element (aside from their bigotry) is the tribalism. It must be replaced with more positive behaviors by effective leaders of various institutions including churches and the government. And business of course.

The other serious problem is Evangelical schools. At least Catholic schools promote critical thinking, the Jesuits, Franciscans, etc. all produced innumerable scholars and historians of note. Evangelical schools only teach ignorance and ingrain the backward thinking.

I agree with the idea that religion creates a perfect situation for manipulation. Grifters love it, and it is shocking how many church leaders are caught in schemes.

[quote] R17: As far as the Jesus stuff was concerned, I kind of thought of Jesus as a good cowboy who rode into a bad town. He got his disciples together and they were kind of like The Magnificent Seven and Jesus was one of the four who were killed.

I understand that the Catholic tradition teaches that all the Apostles, except one (because he disappeared) are know to have died martyrs deaths.

I was talking about the movie, R38. Four were killed, one stayed in the village and two went back home. It was a symbolic connection I made, not a literal one, of Jesus being like the the leader of the magnificent seven and he got killed.

I was 6 and 7 years old.

The only Christians I can usually stand are Episcopals. They just don't give a shit, love to drink, have sex, let gays and women serve as clergy, and have a "just don't hurt anyone" attitude about everything. I can live with that. The Southern Baptists and Pentecostals are the fucking worst. They're so repressed and judgmental about everything.

Religious bigotry

R40 On the upside, those same qualities make the Baptists and Pentecostals easy to taunt!

My very religious aunt was raised Methodist. She had an affair with her husband’s best friend, and then her husband died in a motorcycle accident and she married the best friend and became a Southern Baptist. She is pretty condemning of other people’s choices. Oh, and her son is bipolar with a violent history and works in a gun shop and used to work part time as an armed guard in (really) a megachurch.

The Puritans were terrible. I was taught in colonial american history that the puritans cane to America for religious freedom, but they actually came here because the British had had enough of them & their fundamentalist nonsense. When the Puritans Dane t9 the US one if the first things they did was forbid Quakers and others from holding any kind of political power.

Plus, in American history they told us the Pilgrims founded America when in fact British America was founded by a company to reap wealth.

For those posters who wonder why Catholics stay in the church after the revelations about the abuse cover-up, did you read Egan's article? There are two Catholics presented in it. There's the nun who's working with those on the margins. She's living the gospel. She see the church as a community of believers. Then there's the archbishop, who sees the church as a set of beliefs.

There's your answer. We're like the nun. And even the hierarchy knows today that it must be accountable. They cannot cover the abuse up anymore.

There's always been a wide gulf between the popular and official church. Hence the people in the pews are more accepting about issues like acceptance of LGBT individuals and marriage equality. Even among the hierarchy, though, there is change. A few years ago, a Belgian bishop said that the church will have to recognize same-sex unions and develop rites for blessing them. Theologians across the globe argue the same, as do German bishops. The pope just named an Italian archbishop who is known for his outreach to the LGBT community a cardinal. In this country, look at the Archbishop of Newark and the Bishop of Bridgeport and their more welcoming stances than their fellow bishops.

Is it enough? Of course not. But the change is coming. Will I see it in my lifetime? Sadly, probably not. Still, I hope. And that's rooted in my Catholic faith. That is hard to understand for non-Catholics.

As for knowing the Bible, well pre-Vatican II Catholics were not encouraged to read the Bible. Post-Vatican II was different. I grew up in the post-Vatican II church. I went to a Jesuit high school and a Jesuit university. In high school, we read the OT in freshman year theology and the NT in sophomore year theology. Unless you have foundations like that or are more active in your faith, chances are you won't know the Bible, esp. the OT stuff

I have a crazy idea for a new religion. Tell me what you think. It would involve radical reform.

First, no one who hurts or rapes children allowed.

No one who rapes anyone allowed.

Murder is totally not OK.

It’ll teach people to think about how they would feel before they do or say to another person, and if it doesn’t feel good, not to do it.

So basically by U.S. Christian terms, it would be the church of the Antichrist, entirely focused on treating other people well and encouraging them instead of hating them.

It won’t fly here, will it?

[quote]I have a Catholic coworker who knows *nothing* about the Bible.... she’s actually always been taught not to read the Bible itself at all, because only priests can interpret what the Bible says.

OMG, such utter bullshit, either made up by the poster or the woman herself. No, Catholics don't, as a rule, read small sections of the Bible and take them literally without any understanding the greater whole of salvation history. That's how evangelicals get themselves in trouble. Priests tend to be bible scholars, for sure, because they study it intensely for years. They have a deep knowledge of how:

[quote]"the Old Testament foretells for the New and the New Testament fulfills the Old- the two shed light on each other; both are true Word of God" (CCC 140)

That said, Catholics are very much encouraged to read the Bible and pray daily.

Lots of misinformation here. SMH. Catholics who go to church every Sunday for 3 years straight will HEAR all the readings from the Bible in its entirety. It's called the liturgical calendar. If your imaginary co-worker only goes to church occasionally and dozes off while she's there, she may very well be quite lacking in bible knowledge. But if she paid attention and attended mass faithfully every Sunday, she would not only "know" her bible, she will have "read" it 20 times over by the age of 60.

R28 Facts.

[quote]I was shocked when this devout woman told me that her faith has always taught her not to read the Bible on her own. It made sense of how my Catholic grandmother could attend masses in Latin without knowing any Latin.

That's why the bishops call them sheep!

[quote]Catholics who go to church every Sunday for 3 years straight will HEAR all the readings from the Bible in its entirety.

Yep, one little snippet per week, with no context or understanding how the snippets relate to each other. That's how they keep you in the dark while pretending they're teaching you something.

Correlation isn’t causality, r47, r28.

[quote] R48, Yep, one little snippet per week, with no context or understanding how the snippets relate to each other. That's how they keep you in the dark while pretending they're teaching you something.

The Priest should put it in context for you.

[quote]Yep, one little snippet per week, with no context or understanding how the snippets relate to each other. That's how they keep you in the dark while pretending they're teaching you something.

Nope, nice try. That's what the homily is for. There is an Old Testament reading that often foretells or relates to the New Testament reading, then the Gospel. Then the priest does a homily that ties it all together and relates it that days readings to our lives today.

Go to church sometime and see what it's really all about instead of spouting nonsensical babble.

R49 looking at almost any major world conflict throughout history: a difference of religion is a big root cause. Fuck religion

A lot of priests are terrible homilists, or just talk about some unrelated random topic.

R52, the major conflicts in the modern world have secular origins. The greatest mass murders in the 20th century were committed in the name of secular ideologies.

I hope I can be diplomatic about this, but, statistically, half the population is of below average intelligence. So, in Church or in catechism classes, they can’t teach to the brightest bulbs and have to dumb it down to the lowest student IQ.

I have a Catholic Bible, which, incidentally, differs in some places from the King James’ version, and is filled with footnotes explaining what the original source meant. For example, they’ll tell you what a drachma is, and maybe compared to day-wages at the time of Christ; or it’ll explain what “turning the other cheek” meant when it was stated, and so forth.

I believe that much of the Bible can’t really be understood without interpretation by a Bible student, or annotated Bible.

[quote] A few years ago, a Belgian bishop said that the church will have to recognize same-sex unions and develop rites for blessing them

How about they start off their magnanimous liberalism by allowing women to be priests and allowing priests to marry first.

Protestantism is what's really threatened by a turning away from religion. Protestantism keeps having evangelical movements---so presbyterians (once like those Fascists in northern Ireland) and Congregationalists (who once burned witches) get more liberal, but the overall tradition keeps birthing theses swindlers and the idiots who believe them. Proestatntism has no history of self-referential humor (unlike Catholicism or Judaism--it's all about being on the side that's winning and on top. Protestant non-believers usually seem to hold onto Protestantism as a sign of privilege. It's a horrible tradition that needs to end.

[quote]Nope, nice try. That's what the homily is for. There is an Old Testament reading that often foretells or relates to the New Testament reading, then the Gospel. Then the priest does a homily that ties it all together and relates it that days readings to our lives today.

Yeah, let the priest do it, why think for yourself? The snippets that get read prevent people from seeing the contradictions, conflicts and absurdities the actual gospels. It's sanitized for mass consumption.

[quote] R52: [R49] looking at almost any major world conflict throughout history: a difference of religion is a big root cause. Fuck religion

Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, and Castro, were great evil, and none of whom were religious.

Religion is just an excuse for power projection.

[quote] R58: Yeah, let the priest do it, why think for yourself? The snippets that get read prevent people from seeing the contradictions, conflicts and absurdities the actual gospels. It's sanitized for mass consumption.

The Christian Bible is ancient. When you read it, you are reading material that was translated and well-vetted centuries ago. So, whether you hear it from a priest, or read it yourself, you “aren’t thinking for yourself”.

If you read Aramaic and Greek, and get access to the earliest works, and translate them, then you can claim that you think for yourself.

[quote]A lot of priests are terrible homilists, or just talk about some unrelated random topic.

Now, this I agree with. Some are fantastic, some are pretty bad. It's a crap shoot. One of the priests at my church is always relaying stories about his youth growing up in a big Italian family. He's a 55 y/o man and all he talks about is his childhood and his mother's cooking. It's kind of creepy. Seems like arrested development in a way.

I have a theory that some priests tend to talk about their childhoods a lot because it's the only time in their lives we can all relate to. They were just like us then. Now....not so much. It's also frustrating to hear benign and boring stories about lasagna and little league when we just had two shooting sprees the week before. He should have said something about that.

[quote] How about they start off their magnanimous liberalism by allowing women to be priests and allowing priests to marry first.

Sure, R56. But I thought I'd confine the topic to gay issues.

They’ve got a LONG way to go before they even start to talk about making women priests.

IMO, there are already enough rules and regulations in life: federal laws, state laws, county ordinances, rules (formal and informal) related to your continued employment, etc.

Religions (some) impose yet another set of rules and regulations -- but by your own choice, self-imposed.

I'm not talking about "Thou Shalt Not Kill"; that's a good rule and an obvious one.

This is actually a good list.

Chosen people.

Heretics.

Holy war.

Blasphemy.

Glorified suffering.

Genital mutilation.

Blood sacrifice.

Hell.

Male ownership of female fertility.

One I never thought of: Book worship. I bet the fetishization of books does stem from worship of holy books.

The Bible starts out with the premise that the Jews were God’s chosen people. If God created everyone, why was only one group “chosen”? Doesn’t make much sense right from the start.

[quote] But I thought I'd confine the topic to gay issues

Why?

The thread topic is “Why People Hate Religion” not why only gay people hate religion. .

R66 It makes no sense right from the start. First, “God created man, male and female, he created them” and then later he created woman. (What’s a female man??)

And to your point, God created mankind, decided they were mostly horrible, and he drowned them all except Noah’s family.

I mean, he was right. People are horrible. But Noah’s family were the chosen ones, and they supposedly procreated and resulted in all of us since his family were the only human beings left to reproduce. No?

[quote] R66: The Bible starts out with the premise that the Jews were God’s chosen people. If God created everyone, why was only one group “chosen”? Doesn’t make much sense right from the start.

[quote] R66: It’s a mystery. I don’t understand why, nor why it matters. It’s a metaphor.

[quote] R68: I can’t figure out what you’re point is, sorry.

[quote] Why?

Talking about my comments, R67.

So open minded, those Caths!

R68, I’m no theologian. But your post is a great example of how a bad homily can destroy one’s understanding of the bible, and no I’m not Catholic. Part of the idea of the OT vs the NT is that in the OT God was an mean God, a pissy God. He had anger issues. Also, his love was very conditional. You had to do favors to get him to love you. The prophets of the OT foresaw that the Messiah would be a game changer. Testament also means covenant or promise.

FF to the NT. Jesus happens. Jesus teaches us that the New Deal is that the old promise that God made with us is null and void. There’s a new promise, which is that God is no longer angry, he no longer punishes, he no longer asks us to keep the Law — he is transformed into a fully loving God. And guess what? He now gives us unconditional love. And yes, many many many Christians fail to understand this basic idea — under the New Covenant, you can no longer earn God’s love, his love is given through pure grace. No thing you do, no matter how great or how terrible, can stop God’s love of you. Catholics don’t read the Bible literally, so they understand that there are layers of meaning to these OT stories and that if you read them without ALSO tying it in the main themes of the Bible as a whole, then you’re taking stories out of context — which naturally changes their meaning.

I always enjoy these threads from even an academic standpoint. You should understand certain things about the Bible to be culturally literate. It has influenced more elements of history than anything else, and most certainly influenced American culture. And it does to this day. The Bible was used to defend slavery — and the Bible was used to fuel the Civil Rights Movement. That’s amazing, isn’t it? The Bible was used to subjugate women — and now Christian/Catholic women have reinterpreted the Bible using feminism and create an entirely new paradigm for the sexes. The same book did that.

Anyhoo, that’s all I got. Carry on.

^Great post

Religion and politics go together. The western world deals with fear based religion. Bush Jr. was re-elected based on fear. Anyone alive after 911, remembers all the code yellows, anthrax this, and code orange, anthrax that. They all magically disappeared when Presidential Misfit, George was re-elected.

People are learning that religion only benefits the rich. The Pope with his Jewel encrusted fingers, churches and their stained glass windows, children forced to be molested. No child wants to be a church usher. No child wants to be in church, period.

Christian Fundamentalists are not religious. Their just any form of hate you can think of.

R72 I accept that the gods depicted in the old and new testaments are different gods, or else they show an evolution of the OG, original god, to have become less chaotic and seemingly mentally ill to making a bit more sense (at times) and showing some compassion. That difference is commonly accepted, and it is also confounding. The God that Judeo-Christian faiths worship is said to be all good, and all-powerful and all-knowing. The character arc from an insane and demanding slavemaster to someone who creates himself as a self-sacrificing man to teach mankind to find the god within them, etc., is inconsistent to the point of making no sense at all.

People who adhere to this notion are opting in to a nonsensical storyline that defies understanding or explanation, and to do that as the basis of one’s reality sets a person up for accepting any kind of nonsense as reality. And thus come the churches and their adherents, who reject science, who won’t even opt into the notion of climate change to save themselves, who say they follow Jesus Christ—the allegedly compassionate and most human version of god—by hating gay people, black people, foreigners, et al.

I agree that making an effort to become familiar with this text is necessary for anyone living in this culture. I majored in English, and couldn’t have done so without learning religions and in particular having some familiar with biblical texts because so much fiction is allegorical to them, and the King James Bible influenced so much literature and it can be quite poetic. It’s also useful for studying translations and getting a sense of the power of editing and the choices of editors, which are not benign.

“The LORD God said, ‘The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever’” (Genesis 3:22)

^^Yet another “problematic” passage from Genesis that has been explained in many different ways. Perhaps it’s a translation issue. Perhaps—the more likely default explanation, even for those who claim the Bible is to be taken literally—God was speaking metaphorically or using the “royal we” (Why? Everywhere else he says “I.”)

After Adam and Eve ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, they were kicked out of Eden. Common knowledge tells us that that was a punishment for their sin. A more careful reading suggests it was not merely a punishment, but also a protective and defensive measure, because this one god of the old testament feared they would eat from the other forbidden tree—of life—and then “become like one of us.” Why the plural if God is one god? (People will invent answers, but this seems like an important question off the bat.) Is god referring to the pantheon that pretty much all other ancient polytheistic religions believed in? We’re not supposed to allow that question to be asked.

And what were these trees? The story that people believe, that Satan, a fallen heavenly deity, flew out of hell and turned himself into a reptile and then told Eve to eat a forbidden fruit, is pretty nutty and yet most devout Christians know and accept the story.

As psychedelics research becomes more mainstream, hopefully consideration that these forbidden trees may have been psychoactive plants will be introduced into serious research. Egypt and other ancient societies depicted their gods with “trees of life” that are psychedelic substances—acacia in the case of Egypt. Mushrooms can be found throughout religious artwork in Europe and Mesoamerica. Other cultures use other means to access a different mindspace, a realm of the gods, where they have visions and receive information about life. I think that this is our religious past and our spiritual future, and it would explain the otherworldliness of so many stories as well as the psychedelic basis of so much religious art, from visions of serpents to translations of geometric psychedelic designs into kaleidoscopic Islamic mosaics, Christian stained glass rose windows, cathedral ceilings, etc.

My father recently asked his Baptist sister how she reconciles the old testament with the new testament, and she told him that “oh, Jesus fixed everything that was wrong with old testament, so you don’t need to read it. Just read the bible, that’s all you need!”

Strange how this 'new' god supposedly gives us unconditional love, yet the religions that have been set up to worship said deity are full of condemnation and warning of the god's judgment if people don't follow what the church tells them to do. 'Unconditional' is actually full of conditions, and the deck is stacked in favor of the ones wielding the power.

[quote]A priest with bad intentions—and we have already discussed that an estimated 1 in every 100 priests is a child rapist, according to Pew—can wield his position like a flaming sword when he has this much control over people.

One of the reasons child abuse in the church was covered up for so long was that all the priests and bishops have "dirt"on each other -- this one may not abuse children but he's having an affair with a married woman, that one hangs out on Grindr, that one is a pornography addict, etc. They all know about it, either through confessing to each other formally or through the church grapevine, which is 100 times as gossipy as DL. Nobody wants their secrets exposed, so they all cover for each other.

I've heard that some seminary instructors encourage/abet their charges to engage in decidedly non-Catholic behaviors ... and then use their knowledge of that info to keep these eventual priests (and bishops and cardinals) "in line" for the rest of their lives.

Why do you have to go somewhere- join something- to believe in something?

[quote]Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, and Castro, were great evil, and none of whom were religious.

First, one does not have to be religious to use religion to attain power.

Second, power and religion are so tightly intertwined, it is impossible to claim that any (great/evil, take your pick) leader isn't religious. Just because they don't wear the vestments or Hasidic garb (again, just two examples of many) does not mean that they are not using religion to achieve their ends.

Third, it is just as religious to use religion [italic]against[/italic] believers as it is to use religious reasoning to achieve a positive outcome.

Why, you'd think religion was just another word for salesmanship, or in the worst sense, of conning people to do irrational things that they otherwise would not.

In the words of R72, I'm no theologian, so I make no claim to superior intellect or knowledge. I just call it like I see it. And that's why, when someone tries to claim that the worst leaders of the 20th century are somehow free of any religious mantle, I cannot disagree more.

Exactly R81 Hitler may not have been religious, but he certainly used religion as a weapon, as 6 million Jews could attest

People say Hitler was not religious, but he was profoundly influenced by religion and by magical thinking. Hitler and high-ranking Nazis were raised as churchgoing Catholics. Hitler supposedly had great contempt for the teachings of the church, but he supposedly appreciated the Catholic organization. But although he rejected Christian tenets, he was very interested in occult teachings to the point of being something of a religious fanatic about the occult.

You can’t call him unreligious just because he didn’t practice a standard world religion. He was a magical thinker and those thoughts drove his most evil acts.

In the 30s, when he was up and coming, he wrote “He who does not carry demonic seeds within him will never give birth to a new world.” He thought of himself as a kind of anti-Christian messiah, giving birth to a new world. That is religious thinking. He believed Jewish civilization was evil, and he believed in Atlantis as a lost great civilization. According to an article in the Independent (Ireland), “He and Himmler held frequent conversations about ‘the World Empire of Atlantis, which fell victim to the catastrophe of the moons falling to Earth.’” Nazis pursued “biodynamic agriculture” to create “harmony between blood, soil and cosmos.” Unlike secular national flags, the Nazis appropriated the Indian swastika because it was said to be a powerful spiritual symbol and they thought it would imbue them with powers. Some people believe that the death camps may have even been an attempt at a mass sacrifice to appeal to “gods” or otherworldly beings as an offering in the hope of gaining greater worldly power. The death camps only happened the last couple of years of the war; before then, the plan did not seem to have been to exterminate all Jewish people.

Hitler was a magical thinker whose actions were reactions to a religious upbringing that he opposed. In opposing it, he created himself into an occult-motivated military ruler whose primary motivations were otherworldly/spiritual/mystical in nature as a counterbalance to the powerful Catholic church he knew. He respected the church’s power but rallied against its philosophies.

Christian and muslims sure. But has anyone noticed how many buddhist grifters are in the news these days. In their fucking robes and beads.

Fraud.

Great thread. R74, I have never read about your hypothesis on psychedelics and origin myths, that is truly amazing! It makes so much sense, I need to ponder it more. I sometimes wonder how old these stories truly are.....are they more than 10,000 years old perhaps? Maybe double?? Maybe 100,000 years old? We will sadly never know. But looking at human evolution and these stories, it most certainly wouldn’t surprise me if they are 100,000 years old or more. Someone chime in, isn’t the Torah believed to be from 6800 bc or something? And the Torah is believed to have an oral history that is much more ancient — so imagining our ancestors discovering psychedelics and using them for spiritual experiences just makes sense.

Also, if you can accept how ancient these stories are, then the Angry God becomes much more understandable. Humans developing agriculture and living in primitive groups would have undoubtedly created much violence — getting the klan to obey required violence at some point. Then it was fear. So our only prototype of a father figure was built upon what humans actually witnessed in their culture at that time. I’m babbling now.

R74, when I was younger I had my share of “trips.” I actually have had some X sitting here for over a year, just looking for the right time and reason to have that type of spiritual experience. I am fascinated at the current research on psychedelics curing PTSD and depression andveven marriages!

I have also been fascinated by modern commune life (non-religious) as an alternative to this rat race, though I could never actually do it. It’s a funny daydream I do when modern life fatigues me. I have a book that is about American communes, it’s pretty fascinating stuff and I hope to visit a few, if only to learn. Many are cults, but most are not. They are either Jesus Freaks or Hippie drop-outs — so there are more extreme ways to live out different beliefs if you choose. I believe there’s a hippy commune in VA that operates several successful businesses that in turn fund the commune. Sorry, a weird tangent I know, but I do think American communes are an interesting sub-set within religious discussions too.

When I was a teenager, I used to hit Dead shows (to buy drugs naturally) and eat at the Krishna temples. If they didn’t have such bad hair, I may have boogied with them for a bit.

I forgot to sign my post, I’m r74, tl;dr I know.

A theme song for this thread perhaps?

It’s really twisted to conclude that Hitler was religious. He called Christianity a “Jew religion”, and he hated Jews. He sometimes use Christian terminology like referring to “Providence”, or “Acts of God”, but if you are going to call an atheist like Hitler a “Christian”, then these terms lose all sense of meaning.

[quote]r3 Say what you want, but most Catholics, including the Pope, are not fans of Trump.

Yeah. They were more into supporting the Nazis.

A billion Catholics in the world, yet always supposed to answer for the sins of a tiny, negligible minority. If only protestants were held to the same standards. Catholic countries like France and Poland suffered the most from the Nazis.

I think the Vatican was pro-nazi because the other option was being pro GODLESS RUSSIA. Which would have put them out of business.

Plus Hitler was Catholic himself, so there was a connection there.

81% of Evangelicals voted for Trump vs. 60% of white Catholics, (which is still a horrible number, I agree). Again, in general, including mainline Protestants, we owe Trump to WHITE voters, particularly male white voters. The blacks and latinos and some women did their jobs and saw the asshole for what he was. So did the Jews and the gays. We all did OUR parts.

RE: Catholics and the Bible. As someone mentioned above, there are 3 readings per Mass directly from the Bible. Usually one OT, one NT, and one Gospel reading. In addition, psalms and other prayers from the Bible, particularly the OT, are built into the Mass. All of these are rotated in a long cycle so that every bit of the Bible will be read to parishioners over a period of years. Until the 1800s, the vast majority of people in Europe and the Americas were illiterate. However, in modern times, Catholics have been encouraged to read the Bible. There are a shitload of Catholic bible scholars and theologians and they have been writing about and discussing biblical matters for 2000 years - there isn't really a trace of unanimity in their conclusions either, in spite of what the catholic church teaches. (The magisterium, etc). However, in general, Catholic bible teaching is in line with Jewish thoughts about the OT, and with mainline Protestant thoughts in regard to NT. It's the evangelicals, with all their weirdo shit, like the Rapture, end times, etc, who are the outliers.

Considering that it's all fictionalized versions of old myths that came from Babylonia and Egypt and a sort of history of Jewish people with a lot of fictionalized stuff thrown in (no Egyptian slavery, no escaping across the red sea, no real kingdom of Solomon, etc), we're making a big deal out of a work of mythology. Most of what we think of Christianity was theology created by a guy named Paul, who never met Jesus going around telling people what to believe about him. Most of the histories of Jesus (the Gospels) were written AFTER Paul.

Unfortunately...

Germany was predisposed to be anti-semitic. It had been always so, at least since the middle ages. Luther was horribly anti-semitic and the Lutheran church was very anti-semitic. Some Catholic bishops in Germany were appeasers during the rise of Nazism) and will always be reviled (correctly) for that. Pope Pius XII didn't do nearly enough, but did save a number of Jews. The Chief Rabbi of Rome said after his death that the Jews would always remember him for the many Jews he saved from death, and also for writing an encyclical (which was also required to be read in every Catholic churches in Germany) decrying anti-semitism and killing people based upon their religion or race. That was written in 1939. When the Catholic church tried to actively intervene in the rounding up of Jews in Warsaw, the Nazis reacted by rounding up all the rabbis there and shooting them, so the Catholic church backed off of direct action and sent money and aid through third parties to try to rescue Jews. But there were lines in Catholic theology about punishing Jews for the sins of their fathers, and these prayers remained until the early 1960s when the Catholic church finally apologized for 2000 years of antisemitism and promoting persecution of Jews for centuries.

Here’s why people hate religion—the subject of this thread. It’s inherently tribal and oppositional. It naturally, automatically programs people to think in terms of us versus them.

Look at what happened in this thread from the beginning. Someone asked why people hate *religion* and the religious people who responded responded by attacking the religion that is not theirs.

“Religion” implies all religious affiliations.

Protestants here are attacking Catholics.

Catholics are attacking Protestants.

Neither is willing to accept that they are part of the religious order being asked about in OP’s question; all they care about is being better than the rival group and its false god.

This is why religion is the basis of so many wars and it’s why I hate religion.

Yes, R96, regarding "us v. them" but then, you have someone suggest:

[quote]It’s really twisted to conclude that Hitler was religious... if you are going to call an atheist like Hitler a “Christian”, then these terms lose all sense of meaning.

So it's not only religious denominations pointing the fingers at each other, but when you make the case the using religion to attain a goal (including just plain, raw power) is religious, they engage in a game of semantics designed to impune atheists as somehow worse than believers because there is this general denial of the stranglehold religion has over humanity, not to mention the role religion (of all stripes) has played in making the world worse off. When all else fails, the religionists always resort to impugning atheists. Us versus them, indeed.

I'll say it again: religion is the root of all evil. Without religion to tell us who to hate, who would we hate? And if you want to disagree with this last point, name a persecuted minority that isn't the subject of religious hostility.

R97, you completely miss the point. Upthread, someone, seemingly a few people, assert the point that “religion is behind all the the greatest conflicts in history.” Something like that.

I countered by saying that this is ridiculous. Even within my and my parent’s lifetimes, we’ve seen that atheists were responsible for the very worst of conflicts.

While your point in r97 isn’t really clear to me, you should read my comments in context to understand the argument. One thing you do make clear, though, is that you think “religion is the root of all evil“. Which is, as I wrote, ridiculous, given the examples I listed of atheists and their 20th century horrors.

Will anybody discuss the article at the OP, or are they only sharing their narrow opinions about personal experiences with religion?

There is nothing moral about these people...they allow the kidnapping and torture of children along our border, these Evangelicals are monsters.

R82, the anti-semitism at the heart of Nazism was not religiously based. It was far more insidious. It was racially based. To give one example: Teresa Benedicta of the Cross. She was a Roman Catholic nun, who was murdered at Auschwitz in 1942. She was sent to the gas chambers, not because because of her faith, but because she was born Edith Stein into a German Jewish family.

[quote]Teresa Benedicta of the Cross. She was sent to the gas chambers, not because because of her faith, but because she was born Edith Stein into a German Jewish family.

But didn't she convert just to appear more aryan, and bury her past?

No, R102. Just no.

Almost every religion on this planet has been cloaked in oppression and violence. And let’s not forget shame and fear. I have never needed religion as a guide to not harm my fellow man. Somehow, I’ve been capable of surviving on this planet without fucking others over. Yep, I’ve indulged in self destructive behavior, but that’s between me, myself, and I. And I’ve seen my way out of that, too, without the help of a deity. And I certainly don’t need some religious dictate, in order to go the extra mile for someone who might need help. If I can assist, I do.

Most people function this way. Religion doesn’t make you a good person, however, it can easily make one a hypocrite, because perfection is fucking impossible.

Wow. I don’t interpret this thread as different factions “fighting” e.j. Catholic vs Protestants, religious vs atheists. I think we are sharing history and opinion. And sure, a few of us got off the rails, but so what?

Again, there's a deep vein of anti-Catholicism running through Anglo-Saxon countries. John Kennedy's election in 1960 was controversial and he remains the only Catholic president to date. Catholics were also reviled by the Ku Klux Klan which was birthed out of Scottish presbyterianism. I think the reason the Catholic Church gets so much attention in the United States where it really is only a minority religion is because of the history and structure of the institution. Many protestant churches, particularly evangelical ones,, seem like your run-of-the-mill corporate business, ergo less authentic in many eyes.

So Pat Robertson can spew all the hate he wants from his HQ in Virginia Beach and no one cares. But if the Pope in the Vatican sets a foot wrong, Americans, especially non-Catholics will react with so much fervour at whatever that was said to be wrong. Take the election of the last pope which happened after the child abuse scandal, the same media outlets that excoriated the CC declaring "the end of the Catholic Church as we know it" sent their leading correspondents to Rome and trained live cameras on the Sistine Chapel's chimney. Even Protestant Trump who got into a spat with the Pope over Mexicans still made sure to visit the Vatican with his entire family. What's the fascination?

When the Washington Monument was being built, numerous countries sent stone blocks to be incorporated into it. The one from the Vatican was hauled off by an angry mob and dumped into the Potomac.

[quote] What's the fascination?

The Catholic Church is very old and mysterious. It has a lot of mythology that comes with it.

And also part of the answer as to why Catholics didn't live the Church during the child abuse scandal. It's not like any megachurch where you can just breakaway and form a new church. That's a very American logic which further speaks to the disposable nature of protestant churches.

[quote]Again, Catholics vote liberal despite their church's issues with abortion, they care about climate change and the environment and call out the orange ogre for what he is.

Uhm, the majority of Catholics voted for Trump. Good try!

Many Catholics, especially the older ones, vote solely based on abortion.

^ Majority of white people (including 54% of white women) voted for Trump. But Catholics generally vote Democrat.

Religion is just "magical thinking" which only retardates feel obliged to believe it.

The bible is dull and also fucking retarded. It is clearly a political manifesto for the illogical and easily bamboozled. Why would I EVER waste my time reading it? Whenever I see old ladies or anyone on the subway reading their well-worn bibles, I KNOW they understand none of what they're reading, and the waste of brain matter is depressing as fuck.

White Catholics vote republican. Hispanic Catholics vote democratic. And Catholicism is not a”minority” religion it is the largest single religious institution in the United States

[quote]Christianity is the largest religion in the United States with the various Protestant Churches having the most adherents. In 2016, Christians represent 73.7% of the total population, 48.9% identifying as Protestants, 23.0% as Catholics, and 1.8% as Mormons, and are followed by people having no religion with 18.2% of the total population.[1] Judaism is the second-largest religion in the U.S., practised by 2.1% of the population, followed by Islam with 0.8%.

Yep. Catholics are a minority

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Like when they sprung that meeting with Kim Davis on Francis. The cardinal responsible got demoted. And of course, Kim Davis, her church and supporters, though virulently anti-Catholic, were very eager for her to meet the Pope.

Well, that's not a semantic argument at all, R97. (How do I insert a violent eye roll? Help me DL emoji experts, you're my only hope!)

Nice sidestepping of the argument, so let's focus on the basic tenet of my argument: Without religion to tell us who to hate, who would we hate?

Oops at R118. My comments were directed at R98 and I'm R97. Someday, I'll learn to get past my religious animosity and remember response numbers. Or at least check them before I post.

[quote] R119: Nice sidestepping of the argument...

I’m sidestepping nothing. I am addressing one point here that was asserted upthread, and doing so [bold] directly. [/bold]

[quote] R98: Upthread, someone, seemingly a few people, assert the point that “religion is behind all the the greatest conflicts in history.” Something like that.

I responded by saying that this is ridiculous. Even within my and my parent’s lifetimes, we’ve seen that atheists were responsible for horrible conflicts.

That’s all.

WWI was also not, a religious war.

Religion teaches tolerance instead of hate. I don't trust that any other system can replace it for the majority. People are naturally assholes and religion is the easiest, most functional way to treat others with the tiniest modicum of respect.

Tribalism is ingrained in all of us. Without religion, people will just fall victim into a more dangerous cult.

Religion is also useful in making people feel satisfied for what they have. The constant pursuit of money or status is unfulfilling for the majority who could never hope to achieve the kind of success that would make them happy, so religion helps fill that void. It is useful in that regard.

[quote]"Why people hate religion".

😂 Most of the world is religious. LOL

I don't think that statement is correct, R125, but I don't have the time to research it now.

R122 AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

R126 most atheists are a tiny, tiny drop of the world’s population.

^ Atheists are a tiny drop of the world's population.

Christopher Hitchens once “rewrote” the Ten Commandments. He actually made some good points.

[quote]...but who cannot summon the confidence to say: Do not condemn people on the basis of their ethnicity or color. Do not ever use people as private property. Despise those who use violence or the threat of it in sexual relations. Hide your face and weep if you dare to harm a child. Do not condemn people for their inborn nature—why would God create so many homosexuals only in order to torture and destroy them? Be aware that you too are an animal and dependent on the web of nature, and think and act accordingly. Do not imagine that you can escape judgment if you rob people with a false prospectus rather than with a knife. Turn off that fucking cell phone—you have no idea how unimportant your call is to us. Denounce all jihadists and crusaders for what they are: psychopathic criminals with ugly delusions. Be willing to renounce any god or any religion if any holy commandments should contradict any of the above. In short: Do not swallow your moral code in tablet form.

Christopher Hitchens “rewrote “ the Ten Commandments. He actually made some good points and it’s worth a read.

[quote]...But who cannot summon the confidence to say: Do not condemn people on the basis of their ethnicity or color. Do not ever use people as private property. Despise those who use violence or the threat of it in sexual relations. Hide your face and weep if you dare to harm a child. Do not condemn people for their inborn nature—why would God create so many homosexuals only in order to torture and destroy them? Be aware that you too are an animal and dependent on the web of nature, and think and act accordingly. Do not imagine that you can escape judgment if you rob people with a false prospectus rather than with a knife. Turn off that fucking cell phone—you have no idea how unimportant your call is to us. Denounce all jihadists and crusaders for what they are: psychopathic criminals with ugly delusions. Be willing to renounce any god or any religion if any holy commandments should contradict any of the above. In short: Do not swallow your moral code in tablet form.

Christopher Hitchens “rewrote” the Ten Commandments. He made some good on his ajd the article is worth a read.

[quote]It’s difficult to take oneself with sufficient seriousness to begin any sentence with the words “Thou shalt not.” But who cannot summon the confidence to say: Do not condemn people on the basis of their ethnicity or color. Do not ever use people as private property. Despise those who use violence or the threat of it in sexual relations. Hide your face and weep if you dare to harm a child. Do not condemn people for their inborn nature—why would God create so many homosexuals only in order to torture and destroy them? Be aware that you too are an animal and dependent on the web of nature, and think and act accordingly. Do not imagine that you can escape judgment if you rob people with a false prospectus rather than with a knife. Turn off that fucking cell phone—you have no idea how unimportant your call is to us. Denounce all jihadists and crusaders for what they are: psychopathic criminals with ugly delusions. Be willing to renounce any god or any religion if any holy commandments should contradict any of the above. In short: Do not swallow your moral code in tablet form.

Apologies for the multiple posts. The site acting weird tonight .

Life has many bitter pills. Death, for one - not only our own, but the deaths of many of our loved ones before we kick it ourselves. Pain, for another. In the lives of many people, hunger, homelessness, fear, war, horrible weather events, natural disasters. TS Eliot said many years ago, "Humankind cannot bear too much reality".. To escape reality, many turn to mind-altering substances - others turn to religion. Many do both. Very rarely can someone look squarely in the eye of a life that is necessarily doomed, and say, "ok, this is what it is, I have no idea why I'm here or what I'm supposed to do with this finite number of years on this planet, but I'm going to try to make the best of it in the only ways I know how".

Religion holds out the possibility of life after death (in the case of Christianity and Islam), reincarnation (Hinduism, Buddhism), either/or (Judaism), or other possibilities that extend our limited life spans indefinitely. These are false possibilities, but comforting for many people. Unfortunately, these beliefs also allow many people to shirk their responsibilities to live their lives to the fullest. They can go to their deaths not having done a damned thing, really, but can comfort themselves with the thought that they weren't horrible human beings , so they'll likely live on in a better place.

Organized religion also holds people hostage to a particular set of beliefs, ones which usually exclude large swaths of the rest of humankind, who, by accident of birth, are raised with entirely different sets of beliefs. It's within organized religion that hypocrisy of the most blatant kind finds its full expression. Organized religions are also the natural home of double standards. We gay people have been punished throughout history by "religious" people whose lives are so horrible they don't bear examining too closely. How many of our "ancestors" by way of shared sexual orientation were slaughtered or exiled in the name of religion? Too numerous to count.

[quote] R124: Religion is also useful in making people feel satisfied for what they have. The constant pursuit of money or status is unfulfilling for the majority who could never hope to achieve the kind of success that would make them happy, so religion helps fill that void.

This is a good point. For most of the last 2000 years, the average person literally had no upward mobility. They had to accept their lot in life as a serf, slave, peasant, and so forth. Not “accepting it” would just lead to a frustrated and unhappy life.