• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Is religion a lifestyle choice?

Status
Not open for further replies.
"God" simply means "superior being". That there is one who is superior to all others in no way means those others aren't still superior to us.

And there are gods who aren't gods at all, but jungian archetypes, personified natural phenomena or legondary humans.

"God" is more or less just a vague reference to some higher power.

Oh sure, using it that way absolutely, the way Christians, Jews and Muslims use it primarily however is in the sense of the Source of all being and the creater of everything.
 
No, there's a limit.

But in the US we don't really cross that line much (an example would be banning ALL birth control because of the religious beliefs of some - that's how things were in the US 100 years ago). Religion holds more influence in other countries, though.

Absolutelyt everyone governs on the basis of their beliefs, their beliefs of how society should run, what is and is nor moral, what is the role of civil society, and so on.
 
Absolutelyt everyone governs on the basis of their beliefs, their beliefs of how society should run, what is and is nor moral, what is the role of civil society, and so on.

And my point was that it crosses from religion to politics - and that's what you're referring to here (Going to vote - and doing so based on your beliefs). That's no longer religion, that's politics.

In our country, however, those views are capped and limited by the Constitution.
 
And my point was that it crosses from religion to politics - and that's what you're referring to here (Going to vote - and doing so based on your beliefs). That's no longer religion, that's politics.

In our country, however, those views are capped and limited by the Constitution.

Voting based on Your beliefs, and if you are in government legislating according to Your beliefs is what EVERYONE does, religious or not, of coarse within the paramiters of the constitution.
 
Voting based on Your beliefs, and if you are in government legislating according to Your beliefs is what EVERYONE does, religious or not, of coarse within the paramiters of the constitution.

I don't think you get my point because w'ere not living in some country that's governed by a religious body.
 
1. Morality and truth CANNOT be determined via the evidence, FIRST you need a worldview, you cannot evaluate whether an action is right or wrong unless you have a worldview determining what it means to be morally right or wrong.

What is morality? Once we have a definition, then we can evaluate that definition in light of the evidence.

So if we can agree that morality is, or being moral is, pertaining to a system of conduct that defines right and wrong. Then all we have to do is decide what is "right" and what is "wrong". In a broad sense "right" are things that lead to health, well-being and happiness and avoid pain, suffering and misery.

If we can agree on that, then we can look at actions that lead to one of these two groups in light of the evidence for them.

Insofar as your second and third statement. No reason to be snarky.

......the truthiness of a claim is proportional to it's truthiness".

In regards to this statment, you correct, but what you really done is express a tautology. Not very helpful...

Like saying; The closer something is to being blue, is blue.

There are ideas and concepts that that are true, but defy our experience of the world and often run contrary to our intuition. That is where evidence comes in. It is a guide to finding truth, even if it can never actually get there, it points us in the best direction.

I believe we've debated the existence of god and we always run into the problem of history. You think (please feel free to correct me if I mis-speak) that history proves that certain actions took place and conclude that god must in fact exist. I reject your claims and come to a different conclusion. Not that god doesn't exist, but that I haven't seen evidence that would demonstrate to me that he does.
 
What is morality? Once we have a definition, then we can evaluate that definition in light of the evidence.
A moral is a self-imposed rule.

In contrast, an ethic is a communally enforced rule.
 
A moral is a self-imposed rule.

In contrast, an ethic is a communally enforced rule.

Though your right, that's not a definition of morality. You've simply identified where morals/ ethics come from (internal/ external).

Though morals are internal, that does not preclude a person from search for an answer to what is moral from an external source.
 
Yes, religion is a lifestyle choice. However, some people were so thoroughly indoctrinated at a very young age that it wasn't a conscious choice made by a informed adult. But give that person twenty years of adulthood in North America or Western Europe and they will generally be exposed to a sufficient variety of viewpoints to eventually make a conscious choice. (although some revert to their youthful default as their brains deteriorate with age)
 
1. What is morality? Once we have a definition, then we can evaluate that definition in light of the evidence.

2. So if we can agree that morality is, or being moral is, pertaining to a system of conduct that defines right and wrong. Then all we have to do is decide what is "right" and what is "wrong". In a broad sense "right" are things that lead to health, well-being and happiness and avoid pain, suffering and misery.

If we can agree on that, then we can look at actions that lead to one of these two groups in light of the evidence for them.

Insofar as your second and third statement. No reason to be snarky.

1. Morality is value judgements of "good" and "bad" on actions, intentions or ideas, that hold whether or not you agree with them, i.e. murder is bad whether or not you agree it's bad or not. I suppose that's a pretty basic definition.

2. health, well-being and happiness of whome? Is that a utalitarian definition?

1. In regards to this statment, you correct, but what you really done is express a tautology. Not very helpful...

Like saying; The closer something is to being blue, is blue.

There are ideas and concepts that that are true, but defy our experience of the world and often run contrary to our intuition. That is where evidence comes in. It is a guide to finding truth, even if it can never actually get there, it points us in the best direction.

2. I believe we've debated the existence of god and we always run into the problem of history. You think (please feel free to correct me if I mis-speak) that history proves that certain actions took place and conclude that god must in fact exist. I reject your claims and come to a different conclusion. Not that god doesn't exist, but that I haven't seen evidence that would demonstrate to me that he does.

1. I haven't, I made the distinction, between ontology and epistemology.

2. I don't believe you can PROVE God exists, but I think that given certain historical events (sepcifically around Jesus), as well as other phenomenon in nature (morality, the contingency of the universe, the coming into being of the Universe and some othes) it's reasonable to believe that God exists.
 
Though your right, that's not a definition of morality. You've simply identified where morals/ ethics come from (internal/ external).

Though morals are internal, that does not preclude a person from search for an answer to what is moral from an external source.
Then OP should simply consult a dictionary instead of asking stupid questions :)
 
I know, and they are still gods and nothing about the christian god negates their existance.

If there is only one God in the Bible, then aren't these just made up gods from man's imagination? There are other spiritual powers. Satan and the fallen angels.
Most of the gods of men fall to one of these or just to nothing at all.
 
And my point was that it crosses from religion to politics - and that's what you're referring to here (Going to vote - and doing so based on your beliefs). That's no longer religion, that's politics.
In our country, however, those views are capped and limited by the Constitution.

Actually this isn't right. Our rights aren't capped as Christians any more than those of secular humanists or other beliefs. Morality is what we legislate. Where we stop is where rights are infringed, in theory.
Everyone votes based on their beliefs, which is their morality. So in that sense everyone votes their religion, with or without God.
 
If there is only one God in the Bible, then aren't these just made up gods from man's imagination? There are other spiritual powers. Satan and the fallen angels.
Most of the gods of men fall to one of these or just to nothing at all.

What makes that God any different from the other imaginary ones? They have books about them too.
 
Actually this isn't right. Our rights aren't capped as Christians any more than those of secular humanists or other beliefs. Morality is what we legislate. Where we stop is where rights are infringed, in theory.
Everyone votes based on their beliefs, which is their morality. So in that sense everyone votes their religion, with or without God.

this is factually false and millions of people are examples of that including myself
 
Moderator's Warning:
This has gone way outside the bounds of the RDF. It has become more than a little political and strayed into "whether there is a God" which is not permitted in the RDF. The thread is being closed for review and may be moved to a more appropriate forum.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom