• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Which religious situation would you prefer?

Which would you prefer?

  • A world with one religion

    Votes: 1 2.6%

  • A world with several religions

    Votes: 21 53.8%

  • A world with no religion

    Votes: 17 43.6%
  • Total voters
    39
Cilogy

Cilogy

Pathetic Douchebag
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 29, 2008
Messages
1,587
Reaction score
374
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Would you rather prefer:

1. A world with ONE religion

2. A world with SEVERAL religions

3. A world with NO religions


Please explain your answer.

Personally, I think religion just creates another excess that conflict to our lives. I would prefer a world without religion, as it creates too much conflict. Even if there were only one religion, I think people would interpret it differently and break away from each other.

If there were no religions it would eliminate that conflict, therefore decreasing the amount of things people argue about. This is my opinion, just what seems best to me.

What do you think?


EDIT: Mods, if you could, please add a poll, my internet connection cut off just before I tried adding one myself.
 
Last edited:
Well 3 but that aint happening for a long time if ever.
 
Religions do not create any conflicts,disputes, strife,hatred, famines, war, on and on......
Ignorance, fear, intolerance, disrespect, does these things.

I prefer the world as is, religion-wise, but with a lot less of the deadly sins.
Another no vote - lousy selection(over controlled)
 
earthworm said:
Religions do not create any conflicts,disputes, strife,hatred, famines, war, on and on......
Ignorance, fear, intolerance, disrespect, does these things.

I prefer the world as is, religion-wise, but with a lot less of the deadly sins.
Another no vote - lousy selection(over controlled)
Click to expand...

Earthworm gets it.

Religion kills as many people as guns do. Think about that.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Earthworm gets it.

Religion kills as many people as guns do. Think about that.
Click to expand...

A world without religion would be a world where there is one less thing to believe blindly in. Isn't that a good thing thus tipping the scales ever so slightly toward "no religion".

Any cons of no religion? Perhaps people who can't handle there being no afterlife? However, there are plenty of people now who can't mentally handle the requirements placed upon them for trying to reach the afterlife they believe in.
 
I voted for a world with no religions. You can have a world of pluralistic societies filled with spiritual people of various faiths, without religion.

One world religion is far too totalitarian.
 
Last edited:
Many peoples, many gods, many religions.
 
I voted several religions.
 
Religion does not cause conflict--people cause conflict.

Religion does not hate--people hate.

Religion does not make war--people make war.

Religion does not kill--people kill.

Religion is not the problem--people are.

A world with no conflict would be a world with no people, not a world with no religion.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Earthworm gets it.

Religion kills as many people as guns do. Think about that.
Click to expand...
So we quit blaming guns for killing people, now we blame religion?

When are we going to actually take responsibility and blame people for killing people?
 
Cilogy said:
Would you rather prefer:

1. A world with ONE religion

2. A world with SEVERAL religions

3. A world with NO religions


Please explain your answer.
Click to expand...

I voted for several religions. I've got no beef with religion itself, and ridding the world of belief in supernatural deities isn't going to do anything to tackle infighting, prejudice and conflict. As we've seen through history, people who're war hungry and full of hatred for the other will ALWAYS find something to hide behind while comitting their awful acts. Religion is only as dangerous as the people who practice it. We tackle the fundies and the sectarians, and religion will be just another force in our society.
 
DarkWizard12 said:
So we quit blaming guns for killing people, now we blame religion?

When are we going to actually take responsibility and blame people for killing people?
Click to expand...

Agreed. Religion practice has never killed anyone - that particular honour goes to hateful, angry, terrified people who hide their true motivations behind religion. And it's pretty hard to believe that those who bomb abortion clinics and hijack planes wouldn't have been drawn to some other way of dividing people into the good and the heathen vermin had religious faith not been a feature oftheir society.
 
scourge99 said:
Any cons of no religion? Perhaps people who can't handle there being no afterlife?
Click to expand...
If there's no afterlife -- no eternal consequence for your actions while on earth -- then nothing that your anyone else does has any meaning whatsoever.

You kill someone. So what?
Someone kills you. So what?


Personally, I dont care what religion, if any, anyone cares to practice.
 
Last edited:
Anima said:
Agreed. Religion practice has never killed anyone
Click to expand...
That's not true. People have sacraficed to gods ever since the concept of gods existed. There's no necessary relationship between killing people in the name of religion and hateful, angry, terrified people.
 
DarkWizard12 said:
CaptainCourtesy said:
Earthworm gets it.

Religion kills as many people as guns do. Think about that.
Click to expand...
So we quit blaming guns for killing people, now we blame religion?

When are we going to actually take responsibility and blame people for killing people?
Click to expand...
I might be misreading the good Captain, but I do believe that is what he is saying.
 
UtahBill said:
but NO influence on government by these religions...
Click to expand...
That's not ever a possibility.

Religion, in all of its myriad forms, formal and informal, is an intrinsic part of the human psyche. I have not met, and do not think I will ever meet, a man for whom the construction "I believe" is anathema. Whenever a man declares his beliefs, he declares his religion.

Man is a social animal, and man is a religious animal. Thus man's religions will inform man's societies, and man's societies will influence man's religions. Government, being the adjunct of society, is invariably caught up in this dynamic.

Religion will influence government; that is the order things. What is dangerous is when government elevates one religion, one canon of belief, above all others, or when those of one religious persuasion use the power of government to attack and oppress those of differing religious persuasions.
 
UtahBill said:
but NO influence on government by these religions...
Click to expand...

DarkWizard12 said:
I don't think Korimyr would have made that a point....:roll:
Click to expand...

DarkWizard's right. As long as religion influences morals-- and if it didn't, what would be the point of it?-- it will influence politics. My only concern is ensuring that religions leaders do not wield political authority and vice versa.
 
UtahBill said:
but NO influence on government by these religions...
Click to expand...
Which, so long as there are people that have a religion, is impossible.
 
Goobieman said:
If there's no afterlife -- no eternal consequence for your actions while on earth -- then nothing that your anyone else does has any meaning whatsoever.
Click to expand...
So if there is not some sky-God to condone your actions then they are meaningless?

That doesn't make sense to me. Can you explain why it requires a God to give your actions meaning?

God or no God your actions are of your own choosing.

You kill someone. So what?
Someone kills you. So what?
Click to expand...
And if you kill someone now, so what? Someone kills you, so what? Last time I checked God didn't swoop down from the sky and stop the holocaust, 9/11 and all other atrocities in this world. God or no God the situation doesn't change.

As I've said before, if there is no afterlife then life is even more precious because there I no magical God with an "undo" button.

On second thought, if I believe there is a God then I can kill people and cause harm indiscriminately because, afterall, God will set things right.
 
scourge99 said:
So if there is not some sky-God to condone your actions then they are meaningless?
Click to expand...
There's no need for you to misrepresent what I said.

As I've said before, if there is no afterlife then life is even more precious because there I no magical God with an "undo" button.
Click to expand...
No. In a universe where everyting is temporary, nothing has meaning. Your actions carry no lasting consequence, good or bad.
 
Last edited:
Cilogy said:
If there were no religions it would eliminate that conflict, therefore decreasing the amount of things people argue about. This is my opinion, just what seems best to me.

What do you think?
Click to expand...

I voted for the third option purely because i did not agree with the other two. Several religions is too little and one religion is just horrible.
 
Goobieman said:
No. In a universe where everyting is temporary
Click to expand...
How are you certain everything in the universe is temporary. Perhaps your conciousness is but why does that matter?

nothing has meaning.
Click to expand...
I don't believe in God and many things have great meaning and importance to me. Do you think I'm lying or delusional or inconsistant to have such a belief? If so, why?

Your actions carry no lasting consequence, good or bad.
Click to expand...
Wrong, they can depending on ones beliefs. For example, one can argue that good and bad are in the eye of the beholder (subjective terms) instead of under strict ownership of some Gods unknowable rationale which is unknowable to us due to his omnipotence.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom