Doesn't This Article Make The Likes Of Scientist Richard Dawkins Appear Profoundly Silly ?

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Blamin ... 2-792.html

Blaming Religion for the Evils of the World is Like Blaming Science for Pollution, Nuclear Fallout and Global Warming

By M. Wizard
opednews.com

Swami Vivekananda once said that if one looks closely at history, one will find that all of the horrors generally attributed to religion were really political in nature. Yet, it's interesting that we never hear politics being excoriated for the world's ills as we often do religion.

The primary message of all of the world's major religions (and most of the minor ones) is love, faith, charity and non-violence. Leo Tolstoy spent most of his later years preaching and attempting to live by Christ's teaching which he thought was central to his life and mission: "Resist not evil":

If certain (many in fact) individuals have twisted the teachings of the great religions for the sake of money and power, whose fault is that? To blame this on "Religion" is no different from blaming the evils and nightmares which are the by product of modern technology on "Science". The fact of the matter is: all of the great evil ever done in the world can be traced to individuals either ignoring or outright mocking values which are at the heart of religion, i.e. ethics and morality.

In addition, Noam Chomsky has pointed out that all of our great social movements from the abolition of slavery, to women's suffrage, to the Civil Rights Act have had their origin, and primary support, in the country's churches and synogogues.

While it's easy to look ar historical events superficially and blame the Inquisition or the Holocaust, for example- ad infinitum - on religion, this is generally done by people who either never felt the need to live a religious life, or simply felt that they lacked the character to do so.

But to blame the religion of Rama, Krishna, Plato, Jesus, Newton, J.S. Bach, Tolstoy, Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Jr... is a downright sin.

Views: 352

Replies are closed for this discussion.

Replies to This Discussion

depends what base your using lol.
To expand upon subjectivity, some things are certainly subjective. Art is subjective, in that a piece of art can mean different things to different people. What leaves one person cold might be a profoundly moving experience for another. Likewise, tastes in food is subjective. One person loves asparagus, another loathes it.

In neither case does a subjective opinion on art or food affect the actual physical makeup of the objects, nor our ability to measure how much oil paint was used in a painting or how much butter was used in cooking the asparagus.
I seriously question your logic there - sorry Michel.
Game over ? Maybe for you, but not for me chum !
Yeah Adriana, aka 'taking the p###'

Haha, I wish it were a parody. Poor Chums. :)

 

 

It has been horribly misrepresented.  Now, if you'll excuse me, I think I need to misrepresent me up some more coffee.
You might say that it has been misrepresented...
You have my vote for Miss Represents.
I second the observation. For whatever observations are worth now.

I agree

James

Your obviously well read in the scriptures ectra.

If the gospels were historical documents.

Do you think Jesus  told his followers to kill and killed people himself while he was on earth ?

This thread was destined for absurdity from the get go.  Absurdity is an important part of humanity, and, as an atheist, humanity is something I try to celebrate.  That's my excuse and I'm sticking to it.

RSS

Blog Posts

Creationists Dispute

Posted by Fouad on December 24, 2014 at 7:26am 3 Comments

Services we love!

We are in love with our Amazon

Book Store!

Gadget Nerd? Check out Giz Gad!

Advertise with ThinkAtheist.com

In need a of a professional web site? Check out the good folks at Clear Space Media

© 2014   Created by umar.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service