Looking at modern Europe the enlightment only happened a few hundred years ago, besides even then womans rights, minority rights and a whole host of other civil rights where only "secured" in the last century. Religious fundamentals have been around for thousands of years.
Ibn Sina, Al-Khwarizmi, Al-Farabi...the Islamic golden age, Thomas aquinus etc etc ..
"what it means to be human - to be featherless, two-legged, linguistically conscious creatures
born between urine and faeces whose bodies will one day be the culinary delight of terrestrial worms.."
You seriously believe that, don't you? *sigh*
Even if it were true, you think Christianity has the answers? It's one of the religions that has caused women to be seen as second class citizens, the remnants of which still exist today. It's one of the religions that forbids people marrying the man they love simply because they also have a Y chromosome. And if you want to follow the Christian moral code, you'd better take off that multi-fabric shirt you're wearing. Ever eaten a prawn? Repent now! And Christians are told to try to live a godly life, yes? Your God spends his entire life eternally torturing those who don't agree with him. Fuck that shit.
And my atheism does not depend on religion in any way. If religion didn't exist I'd be an atheist, but no one would call it that, it would just be 'reason'.
You used to be everything to me
Now you're tired of fighting
I am not certain what you are trying to say here. Are you saying that women's "rights, minority rights and a whole host of other civil rights" were secured a long time after the "religious fundamentals were incorporated (or espoused) in the various religious tracts? If so, then you are making a strong case for the fact that the so-called religious fundamentals no longer reflect the morals of human society, and thus religion is a pointless endeavour.
But seriously, I do not contest the fact that the so-called religious fundamentals have been around for millennia. Where you and I differ is the origin of those fundamentals. You seem to believe that they have been handed down from some all-seeing, all-knowing being that created the earth and the universe. I, on the other hand, believe, that they reflect the moral fundamentals of the society at the time and were incorporated into the religious tomes written by men to ensure the compliance of the populous.
While all answers are responses, not all responses are answers.
But lets look at the ancient Greek philosophers for example. The belief then was that people who where intelligent had more worth to society then those who weren't ergo the unintelligent were dispensable and killing them was justified. If religions incorporated what the status quo was then why does this belief go against most divine religions who deem people superior based on their piety, compassion and righteousness and see humans as equals. Divine revelations revolutionised the societies they were introduced to and gave rights to people who were oppresed and freed them from the shackles of cultural and historical decadence.
"what it means to be human - to be featherless, two-legged, linguistically conscious creatures
born between urine and faeces whose bodies will one day be the culinary delight of terrestrial worms.."
On the contrary, the common man appears to be more insane than the most stricken lunatic. Excusing insanity because it is "the norm" does not remove the insanity. Religion is the least of our worries when you look at the other shit inflicted on mankind such as democracy and the global banking system. Surely tackling these two fundamental horrors is more important than victimising those who wish to retain a spiritual aspect to their lives? Surely live and let live is a sound philosophy? Which is of course why democracy and the global banking system must be eradicated. Has anyone watched the news recently? If you think religion is insane then what do you have to say about economics? I bet some of you don't even question it, you just assume everything handed down to you is valid, in much the same way as those of faith would do. At least religion is not evil by default.
Für eure Sicherheit
Agreed. 100% but without the feminist twist (which was another control mechanism organised by men). That's what organised religion is, a control structure. Whereas religion was segmented and secured merely majority control of mankind its amoral successor, the global banking system, is absolute in its influence. Mankind has never faced a greater evil and yet, religious people remain mostly silent as this classic definition of an anti-christ walks among them. This tells you all you need to know about organised religion and who directs it.
Personal religion is a different thing. Does anyone here begrudge a person his beliefs provided they are not forced down the throats of another?
Für eure Sicherheit
The fuck did my paedo post go to?
Fuck sake.