I'll argue the why: 1. Religion teaches the annihilation of morals. 2. Humans develop morals that are not easily annihilated or at least ignored. 3. There is a 50/50 chance of each human developing more or less constructive and destructive morals. But, because of number one, a human with destructive morals is more apt to act on them. This is why religion is dangerous. Without religion, the chance of destructive behavior goes down.
Religion is exreamly dangerous. Five reasons I say this; Reason One; Religion creates an unquestioned form of hierarchy amongst its followers. Using faith as there ammo, its followers are used as weopans to gain them influence and power. Reason Two; Religious leaders create there own 'divine' laws and morals, effectivly given themselves the posotions of gods. They shy away from the true faith of holy scriptures and teachings, and lead the followers to believe that they come in the name of God, thus they have the authority of God. Reason Three; Relgion is one of the tools governments and societys use to fuel conflicts, wars, and segregation. Showing a different religion as the enemy, using phrases such as "God wills it" or "God bless our nation" are offen used to show the ruling nation as the faithful followers of the true God and that God is in favor of their movements. Reason Four: Religions offen give God a bad name. Such as in the christan religion, they are less succesful in bringing people to God because of their fanatic and aggresive ways. Reason Five; Religion leads to people having excuses for people doing evil or unresonible deads. "God told me to" or "My religion gives me that right." Theres many more reasons. But theres my two cents
Faith is the dangerous thing, it's belief in the absense of evidence, or even in light of contrary evidence. It's basically irrational.
Faith isnt dangerous. Religion is. And before you even say it. All religion is based on faith. Not all faith is based on religion. You can be faithful, which is perfectly fine, but being religious is when courption and hierarchy come into play.
Faith in any ideology can be dangerous, look at Communism or National Socialism, that wasn't rationality, that was faith. You can't "have a relationship with" God if you don't have faith that there is a God, since He does not deem it necessary to give proof of His existence.
Faith in ideolgys is different. Because ideolgys in themselves are dangerous. there is nothing wrong with having faith.
The morals that develop from a human (faulty) source are not to be depended upon. The Guidance from God (perfect) can be trusted in and relied upon. All Praise The Ancient Of Days
Most religions seem to want to try and help people BUT it is some people that get involved with them that destroy them by reinterpreting what was meant.
Depends on what you're meaning by "religion". Most of the claimed "evidence" that religion is A Bad Thing comes from organised religion, Abrahamic ones in particular. That is hardly the basis for an indictment of all religions. Also: what the hell does point number 1 in your opening post mean?
I dont agree with that at all. Either way i have to say i dont completely understand the numbered statements and i disagree with #1. That is my outside observer opinion as personally i was never religious nor am i an Atheist. Like everyhting else people can go overboard with things.
Any faith which is based on dogma,is dangerous "Dogma is the established belief or doctrine held by a religion, ideology or any kind of organization: it is authoritative and not to be disputed, doubted or from which diverged." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogma
I will take exception with point #3 We human beings are social animals, we live in social groups and cooperate for the groups mutual benefit to survive and procreate. A social group that relies on conflict resolution methods such as theft, adultery, murder etc. will in the end have a much harder time surviving than a social group that utilizes a more peaceful and mutually beneficial means of conflict resolution. Also social groups that rely on rules set in stone at one stage of human history will have a harder time adapting to changes in their surroundings that inevitably arise. So I would say that humans left to their own devices will have a much higher chance of developing more or less constructive morals than 50 percent (or they will perish).
Kindly tell a [any]human (faulty) and god (perfect) to send me an email. I await their response but will reply on a first come basis.
