Ben Franklin on Religion (marriage, religious leader, evolution, believe)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
1. Religion may exist for that reason, but that is not the important question. The important question is did it succeed in that. Answer = very mixed results.
2. The question is...did the educational institution lead people to commit certain acts.
3. If we are talking about religion...and after all, this is in the religion and spirituality section of the forum, then why not use as an example of the corruptness of priests in a religious organization assaulting students?
4. The forum has a section dedicated to education. Discussing educational institutions is appropriate there.
The purpose of religion is THE most, and possibly the only, subject that is most relevant in a forum called Religion.
There is a forum called World that discussion of Thailand and your experiences there would be appropriate. You bring that up a lot here.
Talking about managing a school and faculty and students is most appropriate in the forum dedicated to education. Why not take it up there instead of here where you bring it up often?
I think my perspective about religion might be a little broader than you describe...
Religious people might feel they're doing nothing but good by following their religion, but take the typical view by religious people about gays, for example. The typical intolerance or "demonization" of people who are gay is the sort of bad I see coming from religion that religious people see quite differently. Wrongly far as I am concerned.
There's the rub. There's the sort of bad I see coming from many a religion and/or religious person that should be called out as bad far as I'm concerned. Fortunately, this is being done more and more as people in advanced countries make the progress we should along these lines. Despite religious doctrine.
Control of the body and senses is a subject that almost all religions consider as important to spirituality.
Homosexuality is a relationship defined by sexual relationship and some religions specifically consider it a sin, and others don’t. But all recommend indulgence in sensual pleasure be it eating, drinking, or sex excessively as hinderance to spirituality.
Demonizing gay people and denying them their civil rights was an act in general society. That is not what religion is concerned about.
Religious institutions have responded in divergent ways to gay marriages. There is no such thing as typical response to gays.
The purpose of religion is THE most, and possibly the only, subject that is most relevant in a forum called Religion.
There is a forum called World that discussion of Thailand and your experiences there would be appropriate. You bring that up a lot here.
Talking about managing a school and faculty and students is most appropriate in the forum dedicated to education. Why not take it up there instead of here where you bring it up often?
No. Results matter. You just don't like that because the results don't match the stated purpose/goals.
When Hubert Humphrey was dying of cancer, in his last speech, he talked about the problem of people who belong to the 'should have club'. The key part of his speech went like this (slightly paraphrased): He lamented those who one day say 'they should have done this or they should have done that'. 'It doesn't matter what you should have done or what you could have done. It only matters what you actually did'.
No. Results matter. You just don't like that because the results don't match the stated purpose/goals.
When Hubert Humphrey was dying of cancer, in his last speech, he talked about the problem of people who belong to the 'should have club'. The key part of his speech went like this (slightly paraphrased): He lamented those who one day say 'they should have done this or they should have done that'. 'It doesn't matter what you should have done or what you could have done. It only matters what you actually did'.
Yeah...because you don't like it. Religious organizations have stated goals. Religion, in general, has stated goals. They ought to live up to those goals.
Yeah...because you don't like it. Religious organizations have stated goals. Religion, in general, has stated goals. They ought to live up to those goals.
Control of the body and senses is a subject that almost all religions consider as important to spirituality.
Homosexuality is a relationship defined by sexual relationship and some religions specifically consider it a sin, and others don’t. But all recommend indulgence in sensual pleasure be it eating, drinking, or sex excessively as hinderance to spirituality.
Demonizing gay people and denying them their civil rights was an act in general society. That is not what religion is concerned about.
Religious institutions have responded in divergent ways to gay marriages. There is no such thing as typical response to gays.
Again, thanks, and I do think better understanding can be had here even if we disagree about a thing or two. Who needs to better understand what here? I guess that's yet another personal issue subject to one's bias, but personally I think I understand your thinking well enough.
Also, again, I can see the good and bad related to religion, and unlike a prior claim made in this thread, I don't think all of religion is bad, and I don't have a "distaste" for religion. I simply recognize and note the negatives is all. As well as the positives. What's so hard to accept about this?
Having read many a history of religion and/or history in general, I know there have been factors and influences involved that don't have me summing up the purpose of religion like you do. I am sure there is lots of room for better understanding along those lines too. Much room.
I'm not as quick to decouple followers of a religion with the religion itself, and since you like the example of education as compared to religion, I see no difference in this respect. If, for example, there was something about education that I felt was wrong or bad, I'd be just as quick to point it out and call for it's removal from all education. Same as I do with regard to what I see as wrong or bad about religion, any religion.
If an educational text book contained misinformation, I'd want a correction made and no more teaching of the misinformation. Same thing with holy books that contain information and/or guidance that unfortunately is wrong and bad. We've all seen these passages.
Also of course I've got no magic wand, and nothing I explain in this forum, none of my opinion will change what I view as wrong or bad about religion. I know this, but that we can't distill the "good, bad or ugly" about any topic, including religion, in this forum about religion, strikes me as a bad case of confirmation bias to the extreme. Nothing good about that!
Stop trying to control the discussion and just be a part of the discussion.
I am following your method just for you. - don't address questions asked; control the discussion by declaring what should be discussed where.; make up rules for others that dont apply to self. Be oblivious to all this while making demands of others.
I am following your method just for you. - don't address questions asked; control the discussion by declaring what should be discussed where.; make up rules for others that dont apply to self. Be oblivious to all this while making demands of others.
That has nothing to do with Ben Franklin or the validity of his beliefs.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.