• 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!

Do you really believe in religion or do you conform for socioeconomic advantages?

Do you really believe in religion or do you conform for socioeconomic advantages?

  • Yes I really believe in religion.

    Votes: 20 83.3%

  • No I conform belief in religion for socioeconomic advantages

    Votes: 4 16.7%
  • Total voters
    24
ecofarm said:
You misunderstand, it's not about specific advantage, it's about systemic privilege. You need to understand that concept before you can begin to discuss what others are talking about.
Click to expand...

You still have of yet to demonstrate the existence of either.

Victim card.
Click to expand...

So you do, in fact, deny historical and present reality then.
 
Perotista said:
What does one have to do with the other? I know a lot of those who are very religious who are good off due to their socioeconomic advantages and other who are very religious who haven't had that socioeconomic advantage. The same goes for the non-religious. So your title of this thread has me confused.
Click to expand...


I simply mean by this that religion everywhere functions as a river through which various networked people can and do meet on a social, economic level. Certainly this isn't always so and certainly there are religious people who don't know how to properly utilize the networking potential of religious affiliation and certainly there are people like me who aren't religious but know all too well how to utilize or "grease" the network (religion) for what it truly is, a networking tool for money, sex and socioeconomic security.



Think of every religion as a Soviet Union. Within that union exists:

A: Masses of adherents who firmly believe in the union but will never grasp its socioeconomic nepotistic rewards structure or figure out how to make it "work" for them like it was created to
B: A medium sized group of adherents who has reservations but does reap some socioeconomic rewards from the union
C: The small group that understands fully how to maximize the union for socioeconomic networking at the highest levels of society. This group understands it's a social mafia-esq networking tool. They aren't drinking the cool-aid internally but officially they're the first to shake Stalin's hand, or, in this case, wear a cross necklace.
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
Some of us care about what's inside, rather than shallow appearances and gestures, much less money, which I found is more likely to damage your happiness than improve it, after a certain point.
Click to expand...

SmokeAndMirrors said:
What do your lies have to do with her? Nothing.

Do you know that, or do you just assume to make yourself feel better? I guess if it's true, then enjoy your mutual dishonesty together. Whatever.

Being anti-manipulation is the same as being a religious dictator? Whatever. :coffeepap
Click to expand...

"Caveat emptor," no? ;)

His approach is, admittedly, hardly the most "moral" with regard to sex and relationships I've ever heard of. However, since when has the modern "sexual marketplace" ever rewarded morality in the first place? :lol:

No offense, but the above seems like kind of an odd criticism coming from a member of the "sexual liberation" and "free love" crowd.
 
Last edited:
Gathomas88 said:
"Caveat emptor," no? ;)

His approach is, admittedly, hardly the most "moral" with regard to sex and relationships I've ever heard of. However, since when has the modern "sexual marketplace" ever rewarded morality in the first place? :lol:

No offense, but the above seems like kind of an odd criticism coming from a member of the "sexual liberation" and "free love" crowd.
Click to expand...

Well yeah. That's the nature of life, really. But that fact doesn't change that people acting immorally deserves scrutiny.

Dude, "free love"? What the hell do you even mean? I don't believe in a "marketplace," because the very phrase itself attempts to invalidate the value of people's relationships. And I would think that "marketplace" and "love"-anything are naturally contradictory, so I don't very well understand how I could be both simultaneously.

Instead of your constant moaning about the super-villain hippie-commie you've made up in your head, you could try actually asking me what I think for either myself, or as a general concept, of relationships.

As a concept, what I advocate is very simple: that people are able to be in the types of relationships they desire, and that all of us act with conscience and ethics towards our partners. This breaks the second part of that.
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
Well yeah. That's the nature of life, really. But that fact doesn't change that people acting immorally deserves scrutiny.

Dude, "free love"? What the hell do you even mean? I don't believe in a "marketplace," because the very phrase itself attempts to invalidate the value of people's relationships. And I would think that "marketplace" and "love"-anything are naturally contradictory, so I don't very well understand how I could be both simultaneously.

Instead of your constant moaning about the super-villain hippie-commie you've made up in your head, you could try actually asking me what I think for either myself, or as a general concept, of relationships.

As a concept, what I advocate is very simple: that people are able to be in the types of relationships they desire, and that all of us act with conscience and ethics towards our partners. This breaks the second part of that.
Click to expand...


Well, I hate to break to you, but what guys like Ryan "desire" is dat booty. :lol:

Faking religious devotion simply happens to get it for him from women who are either gullible enough to believe the act, or apathetic enough not to care.

Sooo.... From your ideological perspective, anyway, I'm not seeing the issue. :shrug:

Besides which, the "market" is a fact of life, especially given the commodification of sexuality for its own sake our culture has undertaken in recent decades. In that regard, guys like Ryan can essentially be viewed as simply being entrepreneurs like any other.

He's found, for all intents and purposes, a "marketing gimmick" that happens to work for him.

I might not happen to approve of his methods. However, as far as results are concerned, they would seem to have achieved the desired effect.
 
Last edited:
tech30528 said:
There is no financial gain for most people because of their religion.
Click to expand...


Completely false.



Contrary to what most people would say, the vast majority of people anywhere on earth including America are hired at their jobs because they knew someone who knew someone who knew that someone solely because that someone either, in no specific order:

-Knew them from intermarried family
-Knew them via family that maintains connection via religion
-directly via familial connections based entirely off sociocultural religious factionalism



Now I will give you this that this reality and discussion on the interconnectivity between religion on a sociocultural level and how that gets people the world over jobs is not a simple "here's how it works" answer but it most certainly is the reality and is what I mean when I say "socioeconomic religious benefits package". In a nutshell, jobs or the chance at jobs and certainly at the higher level business dealings and investments.
 
Gathomas88 said:
Well, I hate to break to you, but what guys like Ryan "desire" is dat booty. :lol:

Faking religious devotion simply happens to get it for him from women who are either gullible enough to believe the act, or apathetic enough not to care.

Sooo.... From your ideological perspective, anyway, I'm not seeing the issue. :shrug:

Besides which, the "market" is a fact of life, especially given the commodification of sexuality for its own sake our culture has undertaken in recent decades. In that regard, guys like Ryan can essentially be viewed as simply being entrepreneurs like any other.

He's found, for all intents and purposes, a "marketing gimmick" that happens to work for him.

I might not happen to approve of his methods. However, as far as effectiveness is concerned, it would seem to have achieved the desired effect.
Click to expand...

Is this the first time you and Smoke & Mirrors agreed on anything?
 
Ryan5 said:
But you totally don't respect her choice at all.


-You're assuming she doesn't really know I'm not very religious. Women want you to appear religious. They don't believe themselves most of them.

-You aren't respecting her choice. She's there. You're not. You're using the same logic of an Iranian Mullah.
Click to expand...

I am not sure that you really understand "what women want," but I would say that it begins with seeing a woman as that--an individual who is female.
 
The poll should include an option for people who don't conform but openly admit to being atheist / agnostic.

I'm non-religious. In fact I don't even claim to be "spiritual". My personal view is that religion is an opiate for the masses. I don't discuss religion with friends, family or colleagues so any potential advantage / disadvantage associated with religion and social interaction are avoided.

Even in the most beautiful sense of a spiritual relationship with a higher power I think most every religion comes with too many crazy caveats, prerequisites, or just general baggage. I also find that the most religious in society tend to be completely delusional and out of touch with their fellow man. As my mom would say "so heavenly minded that they're no earthly good".

Coming from Italian roots and dating a Filipino I do go to mass from time to time. I don't mind going, and sometimes I even learn something, but I don't think I'll start believing in the virgin birth anytime soon.
 
Hard Truth said:
Is this the first time you and Smoke & Mirrors agreed on anything?
Click to expand...

We agreed?

I was simply questioning the "moralistic" stance she was taking on this particular issue. As far as her ideological position is concerned, it should be "A-okay." lol
 
nota bene said:
I am not sure that you really understand "what women want," but I would say that it begins with seeing a woman as that--an individual who is female.
Click to expand...

Never said I do.



All I understand so far after 27 years is what the women who I want to have sex with seem to want. In no order that is:

-Christian
-Say I will go to church with her (she'll never actually insist on doing it)
 
Ryan5 said:
I simply mean by this that religion everywhere functions as a river through which various networked people can and do meet on a social, economic level. Certainly this isn't always so and certainly there are religious people who don't know how to properly utilize the networking potential of religious affiliation and certainly there are people like me who aren't religious but know all too well how to utilize or "grease" the network (religion) for what it truly is, a networking tool for money, sex and socioeconomic security.



Think of every religion as a Soviet Union. Within that union exists:

A: Masses of adherents who firmly believe in the union but will never grasp its socioeconomic nepotistic rewards structure or figure out how to make it "work" for them like it was created to
B: A medium sized group of adherents who has reservations but does reap some socioeconomic rewards from the union
C: The small group that understands fully how to maximize the union for socioeconomic networking at the highest levels of society. This group understands it's a social mafia-esq networking tool. They aren't drinking the cool-aid internally but officially they're the first to shake Stalin's hand, or, in this case, wear a cross necklace.
Click to expand...

Thank you, now I got it.
 
Ryan5 said:
I know for a fact that I don't believe in religion at all but I'm officially a Christian for socioeconomic reasons.
Click to expand...

I don't really understand your poll. Religions are a fact, not a belief; they exist, and denying that they do would be silly. I do believe in God.
 
Gathomas88 said:
We agreed?

I was simply questioning the "moralistic" stance she was taking on this particular issue. As far as her ideological position is concerned, it should be "A-okay." lol
Click to expand...

Both of you disapproved of the OP's deception of women.

Smoke: "I judge you for lying to her to get in her pants, as I said."

Gathomas: "His approach is, admittedly, hardly the most "moral" with regard to sex and relationships I've ever heard of"
 
Last edited:
nota bene said:
I don't really understand your poll. Religions are a fact, not a belief; they exist, and denying that they do would be silly. I do believe in God.
Click to expand...


That's not the only thing you don't understand, clearly, lol.


Nobody's denying religions exist..



Ah, the Internets..
 
I guess I would sta that I am more spiritual than religious, although I claim Christianity as my religion. Like Jessie Booth, I no longer claim any particular denomination. I really do believe in God, and in Jesus' sacrifice for my sins. I don't believe that Christianity is the only way. I believe that Christ is the only way, but not that he has a one shot, this is the only method you're getting deal. If God loves man as much as is claimed then He has multiple methods for winning us back and Jesus is the one running the various projects.
 
Ryan5 said:
That's not the only thing you don't understand, clearly, lol.

Nobody's denying religions exist..

Ah, the Internets..
Click to expand...

Your poll asks "Do you really believe in religion?"
 
nota bene said:
Your poll asks "Do you really believe in religion?"
Click to expand...


Yes but it's implying a particular religion. Sorry for being short with you. Skyping and texting keeping me busy. The single mothers are wild tonight it seems.
 
Neither answer fits me. I am not religious and see no real value in it socio-economically speaking or other wise. It seems to be an out of date social club.

I don't believe in religion at all.
 
Gathomas88 said:
Well, I hate to break to you, but what guys like Ryan "desire" is dat booty. :lol:

Faking religious devotion simply happens to get it for him from women who are either gullible enough to believe the act, or apathetic enough not to care.

Sooo.... From your ideological perspective, anyway, I'm not seeing the issue. :shrug:

Besides which, the "market" is a fact of life, especially given the commodification of sexuality for its own sake our culture has undertaken in recent decades. In that regard, guys like Ryan can essentially be viewed as simply being entrepreneurs like any other.

He's found, for all intents and purposes, a "marketing gimmick" that happens to work for him.

I might not happen to approve of his methods. However, as far as results are concerned, they would seem to have achieved the desired effect.
Click to expand...

I get that. I think lying to people, especially about things that are important, is wrong. Am I suppose to not say that, just because it's a fact of reality that some people act like crappy human beings?

You're much more commodifying of it than myself, or even the newer culture, which I don't happen to think is entirely healthy. You view relationships more coldly than anyone I've ever met in hook up culture. And that isn't a "fact" -- it's something you choose to believe. A lot of people -- in fact, most people in truly successful and happy relationships -- don't agree with you.
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
I get that. I think lying to people, especially about things that are important, is wrong. Am I suppose to not say that, just because it's a fact of reality that some people act like crappy human beings?

You're much more commodifying of it than myself, or even the newer culture, which I don't happen to think is entirely healthy. You view relationships more coldly than anyone I've ever met in hook up culture. And that isn't a "fact" -- it's something you choose to believe. A lot of people -- in fact, most people in truly successful and happy relationships -- don't agree with you.
Click to expand...

I didn't say that it was something I personally embraced. Viewed objectively, however, it simply is what it is.

For quite a few people out there today, today's sexual marketplace basically boils down to little more than the "law of the jungle." People like Ryan simply happen to exemplify that trend.

They're not so uncommon as you might like to think either, especially not among the ranks of the kind of "Alpha male" men who actually tend to be most successful when it comes to facilitating temporary sexual liaisons.

Trust me. Between military school, the actual military, and my current job (I work with tons of hyper-masculine and hyper-promiscuous twenty something police officers, many of whom went to the same military school I did), I've met more than enough of these kind of men to know how they tend to think.

There is a certain logic and economy to it, even if those living it are not self-aware enough to put the matter in such terms. Frankly, the fact that so many women categorically refuse to acknowledge that reality is precisely why those kinds of men tend to be so successful in the first place. :lol:

I simply found it ironic that you would express support for such a state of affairs in so many other threads, but scold this particular promiscuous male for tactics which you viewed as being "non-kosher." As noted, those exact kinds of tactics are largely what this entire system is built around to begin with.

i.e. The commodification of sexuality, and the decoupling of sex and love, absent commitment.

Popular denial does not make this underlying premise any less valid, or sadly pervasive in modern culture.
 
Gathomas88 said:
I didn't say that it was something I personally embraced. Viewed objectively, however, it simply is what it is.

For quite a few people out there today, today's sexual marketplace basically boils down to little more than the "law of the jungle." People like Ryan simply happen to exemplify that trend.

They're not so uncommon as you might like to think either, especially not among the ranks of the kind of "Alpha male" men who actually tend to be most successful when it comes to facilitating temporary sexual liaisons.

Trust me. Between military school, the actual military, and my current job (I work with tons of hyper-masculine and hyper-promiscuous twenty something police officers, many of whom went to the same military school I did), I've met more than enough of these kind of men to know how they tend to think.

There is a certain logic and economy to it, even if those living it are not self-aware enough to put the matter in such terms. Frankly, the fact that so many women categorically refuse to acknowledge that reality is precisely why those kinds of men tend to be so successful in the first place. :lol:

I simply found it ironic that you would express support for such a state of affairs in so many other threads, but scold this particular promiscuous male for tactics which you viewed as being "non-kosher." As noted, those exact kinds of tactics are largely what this entire system is built around to begin with.

i.e. The commodification of sexuality, and the decoupling of sex and love, absent commitment.

Popular denial does not make this underlying premise any less valid, or sadly pervasive in modern culture.
Click to expand...

Well, yes, of course. You're hanging out with crappy sexist men. And as I already demonstrated with actual research, they only attract damaged sexist women.

Those of us who don't run in those circles -- a majority -- don't have the same experience. We've been over this.

It's not something I've ever supported. We've had many long conversations about where I think hook-up culture went astray, why yours is just as bad if not worse, and why your selection of people has led you to the experiences you've had. I won't do it again. You know the search terms.

Stop hanging out with crappy people. :shrug:
 
I certainly believe in and try my best everyday to follow the ethical, compassionate and moral principles laid out in the Bible.
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
Well, yes, of course. You're hanging out with crappy sexist men. And as I already demonstrated with actual research, they only attract damaged sexist women.

Those of us who don't run in those circles -- a majority -- don't have the same experience. We've been over this.

It's not something I've ever supported. We've had many long conversations about where I think hook-up culture went astray, why yours is just as bad if not worse, and why your selection of people has led you to the experiences you've had. I won't do it again. You know the search terms.

Stop hanging out with crappy people. :shrug:
Click to expand...

A "majority" of people don't even hook up at all. However, that kind of goes back to the major gist of the problem with the popular conception of "hook up culture" in the first place.

A) It only really benefits a tiny minority of hyper-promiscuous men, and the probably even smaller minority of women who are either equally promiscuous, or actually enjoy be used as living sex toys by promiscuous men, with everyone else getting "shafted" in one way or another.

B) It upholds aforementioned hyper-promiscuous men as being some kind of shining exemplar of masculinity everyone else should aspire to either imitate or bed down with, regardless of whether they have the ability to do so or not, or it is something they would even enjoy doing. It also tends to demean people who either fail to live up to that standard, or opt out completely.

This has resulted in a culture, and youth culture in particular, with some rather awkward and unhealthy ideas regarding the nature of sex, love, and relationships.

However, as you said, these are all things we have been over before. There is really no reason go over them again.

Suffice to say, I simply find the idea that more "casual" sexuality could ever exist without at least some degree of deception, commodification, objectification, or degradation of the concept of meaningful "love," to be rather naive.
 
Last edited:
Ryan5 said:
It absolutely is a bargaining position for socioeconomic advantages.

A pretty Christian woman's pants coming down because you're wearing a piece of metal around your neck shaped a certain way is evidence enough of that.

Religion is merely a social club that grants access to its benefits structure. You're either going to be a part of that social club and reap the benefits or you're not and you're going to lose out.
Click to expand...

So generally you're admitting you have no core value.
You are without a sense of honor and dignity.
Almost everything about you is a lie, and that's how you chose to live your life, and represent yourself to others.

And you're fine with this?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom