dedy whitefire

debater, UR debaterS

This conversation is closed.

we would allow people create their own religion

Religion depends on the type of person you are. Some use it because they honestly believe they will be eternally damned if they don't, some use it as a way to cope with their losses in life, and still others don't use it or need it at all. Since many unexpected things happen on the earth related to religion,
some people claimed that we need religion in order to live the right role of life. They believe that religion helps us to know more of what we want to be; and how our lifestyle will be and our families as well.
Others claimed that religion has helped burn bridges between people all over the world, but with love we are given the opportunity to put those flames out and rebuild what we have destroyed. We do not need religion; all we need is love.

this is still debatable whether religion is necessary or not. but we are gonna talk about "whether people are allowed to create the best religion in their own point of view."
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance. however, it seems that the clashes caused by different point of views and beliefs may happen and worsen the world condition.

to read: ,

  • thumb
    Jun 4 2011: People make their own religion all the time.
    • thumb
      Jun 4 2011: This is true.

      This post an be interpreted in different ways, but to me the creation of unique beliefs are all a feeble attempt to make the concept of theism more believable.
      • thumb
        Jun 4 2011: ... You should go read my comments on "When, how, and why did you become an atheist?"...

        And I use religion in the broadest sense,

        Because there are religions who practice atheism as there are those who practice theism.

        Although usually I will never agree with theist about a greater supernatural deity, sometimes their interpretations of life, reality and the world are beautiful and logical to humanities progress towards "oneness".
        • thumb
          Jun 4 2011: To me "oneness" will be achieved after insane technological advancements, and once we rid ourselves of ego, and personal aspiration.
      • thumb
        Jun 4 2011: The philosophies, theories, and way of thinking for you then, transhumanism.

        I agree. It is about ego, but aspirations are good for people. It pushes them through life in directions that make them happy. Happy people feel successful, if proper diet is added to equation, then longevity is increased or more likely. If those directions lead them towards, well unfavorable decisions, then that is up for an argument also. (Of course, they do man. Ex: Greed, a high plateau of selfishness, ignorance (not wanting to receive information and not seeking information) and I understand this, but they also make beautiful, world changing (slowly, but surely), entertaining, and more chances for more people to better themselves and compete with others on intellectual grounds beyond just physical standards. "Critical thinking = the art of being right"

        A life without art would be a miserable existence, and art [= human experience or expression expressed in an artistic manner] like music, paintings, sculptures, dance, origami, architecture. Imagine those towards the future; Star Trek, Stormship Troupers (book). In far distances of the universe; Star wars, Avatar (the blue Indian humanoids). Popular art, movies, mad a huge amount of money, because those ideas are where the rest of the big question lay.

        While humans can arguably be doing better with the technology in existence today, yes. However we need minds thinking of ways to integrate that into everyday life. Also a catch 22. I mean, while tech helps life, tech takes work (money) away from people. People who enjoy wealth keep it in the family and/or to self, if tech is replacing a hundred employees what sounds more efficient? Just logical you would want to not share the wealth if wealth wasn't returned equally in some fashion.

        Education, exploration, and critical thinking is the key to all knowledge and understandings.

        The best is you are young, and can ask yourself "Where can my interest bring me to better the world?"
  • thumb
    Jun 3 2011: I'm not really sure where you're going with this, but I'll say that it is already the case that people create their own religion. To the very least, people create their own interpretation of their religion to fit with their aspirations. For example, most Christians who go to church will see that as something fundamental to their religion whereas non-churchgoers will see going to church as not that necessary. Of course these are not two separate religions, but there is a sense in which both have created their own version of a shared religion. If you've got the power, you can even make it an official faction (the church of England owes its existence to Henry VIII's desire to get a divorce, condemned by the Catholic church. I like to remind the members of CoE when they get all full of themselves).

    For others, religion is a pre-made way of life and the idea of creating an individual version of their religion probably has little appeal. they like the comfort of having absolute intangible rules. To be honest, those who create their own personal version of their religion probably also enjoy the absoluteness of their religion, perhaps not realizing that their customization makes that absoluteness a partial illusion.

    At the end of the day, it doesn't matter all that much because it's all made up stuff anyway.
    • thumb
      Jun 3 2011: i like your analysis...
      we also need to think the consequences that may occur in global society... in many nations, such as saudi arabia, egypt, indonesia, iran, iraq, libya, lebanon, india, china and malaysia... there is a tendency where the majority oppresses the minorities in the name of their belief... we need to see that people who believe that they have the same belief have been gathered,by something they call religion, in majority...
      my question, what does influence them to do such oppressive actions to the minorities? and why do they think that their , you say, pre-made way of life is the best among others of minorities?
      if someone has many friends, and his friends have the same belief and ideology with him... psychologically, he will feel that he's one of the strongest people on the earth...socially, he will think that his belief is the best, and he will also consider that others beliefs are suck...
      but, imagine if from ten persons, there are only two persons who have a similar religion... there will be no chance for oppressive-minded person to do such oppressive action among his society...

      i believe that more diverse-more peaceful, how about you? ^^
      • thumb
        Jun 6 2011: I share your enthusiasm for diversity. I guess many minorities are preferable to one majority among minorities. I think the problem with religion is that what unites almost all of them is a desire to proselytize, to convert, to expand to as many people as possible. If a majority can impose conversion via the political channel, that becomes a problem for minorities. So by its own nature, religion is fairly incompatible with the idea of coexistence. Obviously, that doesn't account for the fact that many people are very 'liberal' about their religious beliefs and so act in an essentially secular manner.
  • Jun 5 2011: religion is some kind of personal.
    i think attacking others religion is rude.
    of course we should and could creat our own religion.
    it is just the kind we want to touch the god.
    the universe.
    and i believe everyone has his or her own ritual way.
    • Jun 6 2011: Hi Liaw. I was not saying that religion should or should not be the choice of the individual. What I was saying is; we are an intelligent species and an intelligent species needs stimulation or there would be no intelligent species. Religion feeds that stimulation just like everything else.
    • thumb
      Jun 6 2011: In a perfect world where religion keeps to itself I could maybe find it in me to agree with you. Given that religion can't keep its hands off science, politics and co, I don't care if attacking religion is perceived as rude. Nothing so influential should be dispensed from scrutiny. It's like saying it's rude to scream when you get your fingers twisted.
      • thumb
        Jun 6 2011: Matt, it is not that what you are saying is rude, but misguided.

        You have your own personal religion you create(d) in life based on your multitude of belief systems. You use science, politics, philosophy etc as subjects, tools, and information to build your off of your religion to better yourself the way you want to in life.

        When most say "religion" today they automatically are concerned with the fundamental theist.

        Buddhism agrees with most scientific discoveries; just the wording is different.

        Atheism simply means the belief there is no "god". Popularly interpreted as a "creator god" and/or "an all powerful god", which is what most fundamental theist believe, but only those religions. There are many religions that practice atheism as there are religions who practice theism.

        If, God = driving force in life. You cannot practice atheism against it, and if you do, you are just ignorant in relation to semantics, etymology, and/or world religions.

        We all create our own religion even based off of the religion we claim we practice. Are all Christians, Christ-like? Absolutely not. Are all Buddhist, Buddhas? No. There are Christians who never go to church nor worship Jesus, but still humanitarian actions in life. There are Buddhist who practice self discipline and then work in marketing and banking.

        We create our own religion all the time.

        My religion is the practice of humanitarianism and naturalism which are strengthened by philosophies of nihilism and science. My "God" is working in life that reflects my religion and faith that it is beneficial not only to myself, bu others.

        "God" can be a multitude of ideologies and philosophies. "God" simply is placed in them because we are killer apes with meta-physical connections to one another and the world that we do not understand fully. Perhaps interconnected energy systems. There are new studies that dictates we have at least 20 senses. Senses being how we detect information cognitively.
        • thumb
          Jun 6 2011: Religion =/= beliefs. That's especially true of beliefs based on evidence. I have no religion.

          I think the word you're really looking for is philosophy. Your practice of humanitarianism and naturalism stems from your life philosophy. Sure, your life philosophy could be based around religion. But lets not muddle up subsets and supersets.

          There is nothing more irritating than people who play on the words 'God' and 'religion' to make them mean just about anything. Breaking the conceptual frame of words just make discussions impossibly tortuous. You know full well what I mean by religion and what Liaw means by religion. Feel free to redefine the word entirely if it gives you a semblance of intellectual prowess, but don't fool yourself into thinking that this makes others misguided.
      • thumb
        Jun 6 2011: Religion is fundamental philosophies in which are practiced and traditionalized. Sometimes symbols and rituals are performed to dictate that this fundamental philosophy is your practice.

        Ex: "Atheism" (The pop-culturist terminology) now has this nifty symbol. And there practice/ritual of said religion usually involves debunking theistic religions...

        I am playing on words, but if anything what you came to accept these words as is the new culturist fashion of these words. You cannot group all religions into the word "religion" it is impossible there were and are vastly different religions that practice vastly different things in the world.

        My fundamental/life philosophies = religion. I am using religion correctly here also, semantics are apart of the general subject that is "philosophy" I dictated such immediately upon my response to you.

        I am not going to be the average ignorant citizen and allow people to culture-ize universal words together and make rash conclusions based upon them. If you ask about God in most countries of India they say "which one?" ... in China they will either say "what God?" or "who's god?"... In Sweden "there is no god..".. In the U.S "my God.."

        "God" can vary from force, energy, meaning, and/or being. Practice ignosticism while being an atheist and you will learn more about "religion".

        I am not redefining words, I am using them in their broadest sense. You must be more direct in your problems with "religion" and those seem to be based on theist religions, which I can agree on.

        As my examples of Christians stands... I know very little Christ-like followers of their Judeo-God, I know plenty of them that like to inflict their beliefs on other, not many who are Jesus-like people.

        I consider anyone who claims to be "Atheist" and only "Atheist" to be misguided. That is my "intellectual prowess" based on my understanding of religions and the etymology of the word religion.

        Cultures change words constantly.
        • thumb
          Jun 6 2011: Whatever man...
        • Jun 6 2011: Hi Nicholas. "To be Atheist, is to be misguided." This all depends on the individual's knowledge of what is and what is not. I assume you come to your decision because a divine presence cannot be proved or disproved. God and the Devil exist because of the negative and positive emotions that guide us through life. When things go wrong instead of thinking it is the Devils work, lets think that in the greater scheme of things there are no opposites all are positive. I am an Atheist. There is no God, just positive and negative emotions, emotions that compliment each other and in doing so, become one. It is this mix that creates a multitude of different religions. Nothing else!
      • thumb
        Jun 6 2011: Derek, Matt,

        We can continue this conversation in the new conversation I created as to keep this one on topic...

        Edited: Derek, your assumption is right and wrong. I just think words need to be more than a cultural fade.

        Matt, I thumbed Liaw's comment up. That comment is exactly what I am thinking when I address religion from an irreligious stand point, I challenge you to prove me wrong. Otherwise, have a great day.
        • thumb
          Jun 6 2011: no thanks.
        • Jun 7 2011: Hi Nicholas. Cultural fade is inevitable, that is the process of evolution. Words are like the mists of time, it is emotions that will always rule the day.
      • thumb
        Jun 7 2011: Derek, I appreciate the simplicity and the level of understanding towards my conflicted statements.

        thank you.
  • thumb
    Jun 3 2011: This is pointless.
    Mainstream religions are constantly being broken down by their followers.
    The original principles of christianity are commonly dismissed by many, and most educated, logical theists have broken their ideals down to beliefs such as "god is the creator, anda that is all we know", "god can not be proven or disproven". Basically we have a bunch of agnostics who label themselves due to the attachment that comes with religion.

    I really do believe theism is becoming obsolete.
    Imagine a world without religion, right now. Imagine if all theistic people disappeared.

    Think about atheists, anti theists, etc. Think about how logical they have to be about everything, think about how much more progression humanity can make without the weight of theism.

    99.75 percent of the worlds prisons would disappear, religious dispute is no longer an issue! SO many pros!

    Religion accomplishes nothing, unless you live in a freaking utopia where everyone is free of ego, judgement and personal attachment to principles, and no war or militant action occurs.

    The new religion is technology.
    Technology is a problem, but unlike religion, technology can solve itself.
    • thumb
      Jun 3 2011: Let me make a few corrections for you.

      All Religion is not Christianity.

      If all the theists disappeared we would be missing plenty of world leaders, authors, and other people whom we love and care about.

      100 percent of prisons would stay, (empty or not)

      Judging someone or a crowd based on their belief system is prejudice. It doesn't make you any better then the religious zealot who thinks his pie in the sky is the only valid belief system.

      While it isn't popular among intellectuals, religion has helped many people through all points of their life (drug addicts for example).

      I'm not saying its for everyone, but neither is hypnotherapy, acupuncture, or Prozac.

      Live and let live.

      P.S technology does not solve it's self, have you worked in IT?
      • thumb
        Jun 3 2011: live and let live... ^^
      • thumb
        Jun 3 2011: Technology absolutely can solve itself.

        Clearly you have never thoroughly researched artificial intelligence, dyson spheres, diplomatic nanotechnology, etc.
        Technology is essentially infinite.

        Sure, many world leaders are religious.
        But you need to think not about the things we would lose, but the things we would gain.
        No matter how many things we lose, a completely godless earth would easily make up for these losses, and would surely pass the mere .7 mark on the kardashev scale our current society is a, in MUCH faster time.

        In that sense, my prison occupancy point is invalid. Although, a godless earth would surely have less crime than a predominantly theistic earth.

        Also, saying that we should just let people believe in what they want is great. Everyone should have a right to that.
        But would you WANT people believe in whatever they want, if it was harmful to the very society that protects them?
        Theism - One of the most if not the most harmful concept human beings have conceived.
        • thumb
          Jun 4 2011: A. Is religion harmful to society?

          B. By the remark "a completely godless earth would easily make up for these losses" It seems that you value the lives and freedoms of Atheists more than you value the lives and freedoms of Theists? Is this a correct assumption.

          C. What makes the Atheists better?
      • thumb
        Jun 4 2011: Chris,

        1. Absolutely. Religion is uniquely armored against anything that might stop it from spinning into extreme absurdity, extreme denial of reality and extreme, grotesque immorality
        2. Religion is the number one cause of war during humanity's existence.
        3. My question, in response to your question (but after my answer, lol) would be "How is religion beneficial, and do the benefits outweigh the consequences?"

        B. Absolutely not. I just value their beliefs, and contributions much more. I believe firmly that all human life is of the same value. When I said that, I meant that a godless earth would mean a much more logical people as a whole, and the gaps left behind by those who were theistic would easily be filled by just as if not superiorly capable individuals.

        C. Better?

        Person A prays for food.
        Person B seeks food through logical action.

        By this I mean logic > faith when it comes to problem solving.
        Not saying that people will pray for the economy to improve, but overall atheists are not bound by the obstacles that theism create in our world.
        • thumb
          Jun 4 2011: A. Is it the religion or the religious people that you are referring to.

          Blaming everyone in a religion for the actions of the fundamentalists is still prejudice.

          Religion has helped many people through out their life, it doesn't work for me but I believe people have the right to have their own beliefs free of judgment and free from having to justify it.

          B. Please define contribution. Do atheist poets write better poetry? Do you prefer atheist sculptures over theist sculptures?

          C. You're building a straw man,
          Person A is hungry, he gets a job buys food (while praying when he can)
          Person B is hungry he gets a job buys food (while reading Ayn Rand)

          It isn't theism that creates the boundaries in the world; just people trying to justify their prejudices.
      • thumb
        Jun 4 2011: A. Both. Religion was conceived by people.
        B. Sure, religion has helped people in life. That's great.
        I never said they don't have that right, but a society where people don't choose religion would be far more prosperous and advanced in comparison to ours.

        B. Which do you see more validity and truth in. Not popular acceptance, but truth and knowledge. "a brief history in time" or the bible. Which one has helped further develop humanity. Where would we be if the bible was accepted as the absolute truth. Science is truth, and the truth will lead us to development.

        C. Digression.

        My point was that when interwind with reality religious belief can dilute things.

        Person A refuses to let child take medication.
        Person B lets child take medication.

        Again, what good has religion done for the betterment of humanity.
        • thumb
          Jun 4 2011: We'll never get anywhere like this, allow me to clarify and condense my thoughts.

          I see religion (as a metaphor) as being of little harm to the world. If you acknowledge history you must see religion as of some benefit (it got us this far). Many wonders of the world were done in the name of religion.

          I don't believe religion is responsible for fundamentalists, you can convince anyone of anything if they're desperate enough.

          Topics are not black and white, there is often more then meets the eye.
          Gay and Lesbian rights for example are opposed and supported by different branches of the same Christianity.

          Now if science could prove homosexuality was a genetic disorder, would you as an atheist scientist try to find a cure? Or take up my mantra "Live and let live."

          With all that said it was a pleasure having this conversation with you, it was very interesting to see your thought process not just as a fellow atheist myself but also for depth for future pedagogy.
      • thumb
        Jun 5 2011: Well, first I would not define homosexuality as a disorder. Rather than live and let live, I would say "we are who we are", and it pisses me off to no end that unfortunately kesha made that into a song, btw.

        Secondly, Religion has not gotten us very far. Real improvements were not made until scientific minds started working without the bias of religion.
        How much farther would we be without religion?
    • thumb
      Jun 3 2011: i agree with Mr cristoph... people try to find the answers of their own questions on their life... what? who? how? why? when? where?
      religion, people choose religion as the answer when they find science and technology can not answer their questions...
      further, there are still millions of people out there believe that dancing can "invite" rain... moreover, they do not even know what exactly internet is... how can they know that technology would solve their problem?
      • thumb
        Jun 3 2011: Science can answer their questions, they just have poor elaborative thought processes.
        Many turn to religion because they don't think evolution could have conceived a species so "perfect"

        1. We are far from perfect.
        2. Everything is perfect, therefore we are perfect.

        This may seem like an oxymoron, but it is not.
        You see, if you look at humans and how productive, harmful, etc. we are to earth, and the universe, we are far from perfect.
        But this imperfection we have is perfect.
        Anything that happens is perfect.

        People overlook both of these points, and only look at humans like this "we are able to communicate and have religion therefore we are better than all other species and the entire universe was built by god for us".
  • thumb
    Jun 2 2011: In this era of information , technology why someone need to have a customized religion (don't want to have a twisted defintion of religion, rather taking it as usual definition of blind belief system that doesn't need facts , reasoning or proof)?

    Why it can't be religion of humanity for all ?

    Though it doesn't matter to me whatever one believes if that is not harmful to others.
    • thumb
      Jun 3 2011: what do you think about "creationism"? do you agree with it?
      • thumb
        Jun 4 2011: Dedy, what do you think about unicorns?
      • thumb
        Jun 4 2011: I have more reasons and facts in hand not to be with creationism.

        I see creationism is one of the most fundamental buliding block of all religions (which are much less in number compared to the premise here , which proposes as many as 6.5 to 7 billion religions !!!) & already caused lots of havocs in the history of humankind.
    • thumb
      Jun 4 2011: Agreed if it is not harmful to others you can believe what you like. But often this is not the case.

      We can lead ethical lives, that seek the greater good of humanity and achieve personal fulfilment, without supernaturalism.

      We can be guided by reason, compassion, and experience.

      Values and ideals are subject to change as our knowledge and understanding advance. This allows for progress unlike religion that declares the absolute truth for all time.
      • thumb
        Jun 4 2011: Hi Richard
        Can't agree more.
        Yes that risk is always there with blind & static belief.

        Blind and static belief system is often accompanied by stuborness of making others to follow the same path of blindness , which proven already with plenty of eveidences.

        My idea of unharmful static belief system , seems to be utopic many a times to me ........but even then I again think so ......... may be I love to be utopic ...... or you would say that's another kind of blind belief of mine my friend :)
        • thumb
          Jun 5 2011: Hi Salim - No my friend it is not. :). Its not a belief system. It is something ones does. You love your parents, your brother or your neighbour because you do, not because you believe you should do.
      • thumb
        Jun 5 2011: There have been simulations of utopias before, and usually they do not include religion.
      • thumb
        Jun 5 2011: theistic belief?
        Christianity, islam, etc.

        More so that there is just more scientific thought.
    • thumb
      Jun 5 2011: A religious belief is anything belief founded on faith rather than evidence.

      A religion is anything that uses religious beliefs. Such as God created the Universe.

      But there can be Godless religions also. "Spirituality" for example
      • thumb
        Jun 6 2011: Besides my point.
        In the future these beliefs will slowly become obsolete.
  • Jun 2 2011: I quite like the idea of this, when I walk through my town I see Christians chanting their beliefs; delusional beliefs in my view. If they want to, let them; go for it. What if I were to set up my own religious stall next to them, do you think they would mind? I preach the book of Betty, Betty is my god...perfectly reasonable.

    That would be a fun thing to try to do.
    • thumb
      Jun 3 2011: Pastafarians
      • thumb
        Jun 3 2011: Pastafarianism, it's really interesting to learn how Mr Bobby Henderson's made an analysis on his theory, smart-designed theory of Flying Spaghetti Monster.
  • thumb

    E G

    • 0
    Jun 11 2011: I don't think the people can create a religion , the people always start from something upper on the scale not from the basis , create something true and which will have a positive impact upon people for a long period of time : that person have to be a genius .
  • Jun 5 2011: Hi. Forget religion and start from a neutral position. We all posess positive and negative emotions, each compliments the other. It is the only way an intelligent species can survive. The alternative is to die of boredom. Our clash of views is a blessing in disguise, when looking at the bigger picture. If we didn't argue about religion we would argue about something else, which indeed we do. Football, land , pride, greed; should I go on? Religion serves the same reason as everything else. It is there for only that reason!