"We must resist the impoverishment of public discourse on matters of religion which has come about not only (or maybe not even) because of the threat of religious fanaticism in all its many forms, but also because of a no less virulent secular fanaticism which has taken hold of the intellectual classes. The wholesale condemnation of religion is an ideology which, like all ideologies, involves considerable distortion of history and a lack of the kind of insight which would invite a more nuanced approach to the role played by religion in different contexts." - - [T.B.]
I'll not condemn it. MAY THEY ROT IN HELL for all I care. MAY RELIGION SINK INTO A FIERY PIT AND BEGONE! But people can believe what they want to believe, as long as they allow me the same privlege. MAY A THOUSAND DEMONS DESCEND ON RELIGION IN ALL ITS FORMS AND TEAR THEM ALL ASUNDER! But live and let live, as far as I'm concerned.
Bullshit. Anti-religious "fanaticism" takes the form of reason, science, and critical thinking to better understand the universe and reality we live in. Religion, despite it's well-meaning acts, has been nothing but a plague to humanity as a whole and continues to be such. It steals from everyone, either financially or intellectually, and gives very little redeemable value in return. This is not a distortion of history, but an honest and critical view of it without the whitewashing and candy coating that has been used to explain away atrocities as being "for the greater good". History is written by the victors, but it is scrutinized by the skeptic and exposed by the civic-minded, the honest, and the seekers of Truth. In other words, the polar opposite of those that have, until now, been writing or collective histories.
And you know life isn't easy, it's all about getting your head right.
you want to be around people that make you happy, you don't want your happiness to depend on other people.
if you look deeply into your own heart you will know the way, as you become more special to yourself other people will find you special.
We have seldom, if ever, had fully reasoned and balanced discourse bout religion in public space. And it is the religious themselves who prevent that. They have always been afraid that if we allow discussion about the mythology in religion which has no basis in fact, the historical inaccuracies, and the frequent fallacious reasoning in all religions. They are simply afraid that such fully open discussion would possibly, if not probably, create many more non-believers.
There are four Christian churches within a half mile of my house where as Carlin says -- 'they all gather once a week to compare clothing'. None of those organizations pay taxes. Atheists are still one of the most discriminated against groups in America at least (it was recently national news when a local politician accepted an atheist invocation for a meeting -- after vetting it of course). And admitted atheism is a route to certain defeat for just about every political candidate irrespective of any other consideration.
Secularism has a long way to go towards equality. I don't accept your criticism.
Again from the same Carlin piece -- '...you talk about a good bullshit story... Holy Shit'.
There have been easily as many detrimental effects of religion as positive ones. This post seems like it's trying to say there is equivalence in value between secularism and religion, which is a big stretch. People worshiping imaginary beings does not have the same value as an objective, non-narcissistic view of reality and does not deserve to be given the same consideration. Also, comparing religious fanaticism with secular fanaticism is far-fetched hyperbole, are there a lot of groups of atheists blowing each other up in the Middle East? The "threat" of secular fanaticism is hilariously overblown here and seems to exist primarily in the author's mind.
Twaddle like this infuriates me. I can only hope that this quote has been taken out of context and that "ideology", "fanaticism", "intellectual classes" etc. has been rigorously defined by the author somewhere else, because it's just a word salad as it stands.
I have no use for religion at all. As a one time believer religion simply makes me sick today. There is no evidence at all for any of it being true, and I will only go to a church for a special occasion. That did not stop me from driving 12 miles today to go to the Catholic Church rummage sale.
The 'wholesale condemnation of religion' by secularists is not an ideology. Where is your evidence for that? I see no-one denying the occasionally positive role religion has played in history - for sample as patron of the arts - but overall, the role of religion has been to maintain social inequality and suppress critical thinking.
I basically agree although as an American I don't think secularist condemnation of religion is quite as sharp here in the US as is Christian condemnation of secularism. Sure, you will find extreme anti-theist perspectives in every country, but on average more atheists just want to be left alone. Who is T.B.? I'm wondering if s/he is European bc secularism is stronger there as a movement.
Religion has played such a huge part in the development of human consciousness. As its influence diminishes, there is little to replace it - perhaps secular humanism, art and culture - but so far their reach still seems confined to the intellectual 'class'. The real replacement for religious values seems to be economic and growth is its god. The effect that has on human morality is seriously bad as we have entered a time of spiritual bankrupcy and loss of meaning in life.