wonderfulname wrote: » The big ones did great things for art, science and education at some point in the past, however I can't think of anything current which can't be countered.
cavedave wrote: » Religion has given us some good tunes
jank wrote: » Then of course one can look at atheist societies and see that they were far from a utopia.
jank wrote: » A fairly easy question to answer yourself. Would a world without religion be perfect? No, it would not, therefore religion cannot be blamed for all the ills of the earth. People do bad things to each other, yet I never hear that we should ban people! Then of course one can look at atheist societies and see that they were far from a utopia.
jank wrote: » A fairly easy question to answer yourself. Would a world without religion be perfect? No, it would not, therefore religion cannot be blamed for all the ills of the earth.
jank wrote: » Would a world without religion be perfect? No, it would not, therefore religion cannot be blamed for all the ills of the earth.
Penn wrote: » Would that man have lived forever? No, he would not, therefore I can't be arrested for stabbing him 37 times in the heart.
seamus wrote: » I think it's a bit too general of a question to come up with any good yes or nos on it. If you were to ask on balance whether religion is overall good or bad for the present world, I think ....
Kooli wrote: » And I don't agree that the title question is 'too general'. Quite the opposite - it's a question about specifics, but people are replacing it with a general question that they can just answer with their general worldview
Penn wrote: » It's extremely difficult to get into specifics because "anything" is too absolute, "religion" is a huge topic and "good" is subjective. Billions of people worldwide believe in various religious to varying degrees and it means something different to pretty much much everybody. Not to mention that it's impossible to know what would have happened without religion.
Kooli wrote: » Anything is too absolute? I'm not really sure what that means. Would the word 'anything' stop anyone answering a question about the hazards of religion? Religion is a huge topic? Yes. Again, I don't see why that would stop people answering what would come to mind for them based on their personal experience or their readings or thinkings about a topic that seems to interest them a lot. Subjective? Of course it's subjective. The meaning of the word isn't - well all know what it means. Does that mean people can't answer it? What's wrong with giving a subjective answer? I just hate to see atheists tying themselves in semantic knots to avoid answering what is a very simple question. It seems intellectually disingenous. The question is there 'anything' that's 'bad' about 'religion' has all the same semantic traps, but people would be happy to have a stab at the answer.