More Americans claim to have no religion

[SnookAU]

the main problem with religion is that unless there is only one worldwide faith it will continue to divide us not bring us together.  And isn't that the whole point of religion, ie: control the masses?

The main point of religion today is MONEY.

[Skull and Bones]

My personal belief, if anyone cares, is that "science" (the forces that control the cause and effect relationships in the universe) is God.

[Skull and Bones]

the main problem with religion is that unless there is only one worldwide faith it will continue to divide us not bring us together. �And isn't that the whole point of religion, ie: control the masses?

The main point of religion today is MONEY.

money is just a form of power and the acqusition of power is what motivates us all.

[GhostRider]

the main problem with religion is that unless there is only one worldwide faith it will continue to divide us not bring us together.  And isn't that the whole point of religion, ie: control the masses?

Many believe this, but they are mistaken.  The true point of religion goes back to simple security issues.  Maslow's hierarchy of needs lists security as a basic human necessity.  People have a psychological need to feel safe and secure.  Early man could neither explain nor anticipate events such as weather patterns, droughts, war, etc, so they invented fantastical beings and prayed to them in order to feel as if they had some sort of control over an environment they did not understand.

Morality and Ethics actually arrive from the deep down, pre-programmed desire to perform actions that will most likely lead to the further reproduction of mankind.  Any action deemed a threat to communities (which are a group of humans sharing resources for the sake of furthering the possibility of survival) are deemed immoral, unethical, evil, etc...

[GhostRider]

the main problem with religion is that unless there is only one worldwide faith it will continue to divide us not bring us together. �And isn't that the whole point of religion, ie: control the masses?

The main point of religion today is MONEY.

money is just a form of power and the acqusition of power is what motivates us all.

Money represents resources.  Those with the most resources have the best breeding opportunity.  This is why you'll never eliminate greed from human society.  It's ingrained in people to aquire as much resources as possible in order to further the chance of breeding successfully.  Our only real purpose on earth is to pass on our DNA.  All of our actions revolve around this simple concept.  Paper money is simply a replacement for a giant caraboo and large grass hut...

[kevabuc]

Finally, this country's ignorant masses are moving more toward rational thought...

Or, it could be that this country's once intelligent masses are moveing more towards that of the ignorant minority. "A little philosophy inclineth a man's mind to atheism: but depth in philosophy bringeth man's mind about to relgion".

One man's rational thoughts can be anothers man's superstition.

Sure, because believing in an "invisible man in the sky" (thanks Snook) that hands out judgement and redemption is somehow more intelligent than actually requiring PROOF of such events before believing...

By the way, there is a difference between ignorance and lack of intelligence. Ignorance is simply the lack of knowledge. (ie, the fact that you didn't know that). In fact, recent surveys indicate that education and religion share an inverse coorelation, meaning that the more educated a person is, the less likely they are to be a "believer" in crap like this.

Why do you confine your knowledge to such a ridgid set of proofs? I didn't mention anything about an invisible man, did I?

I wish I could have your arrogance, it would make thinking so much easier.

Arrogance? Arrogance is assuming that your god is the ONLY god and that all non believer are evil sinners destined to burn for eternity.  I confine my knowledge to such rigid proofs, because without such evidence, it isn't knowledge.  It's theory and speculation. The major difference between the scientific approach and the true believer approach is that the scientist is at peace with stating "we don't know".  The scientist then attempts to actually find the answer. The true believer also doesn't know the answer, so to make themselves feel more secure, they attribute the workings to some mystical being, calling it "gods will" or gods devine plan". It's a total cop out.

You have me mixed up with a "true believer", an oxymoron. You are correct about those that arrogantly push their belief's on other, such as yourself.

I only wish that I had the comfort of either the true believer or the true scientist, what I do have is the comfort that corruption can come from both sides.

[Skull and Bones]

but civilizations prey on the human need for security by using religion as a means to control them.  In theory, we enter into a "social contract" and agree to give up much of our freedom in exchange for that security.

[GhostRider]

but civilizations prey on the human need for security by using religion as a means to control them. 

Some religious leaders do, but to be fair, not all of them are corrupt.  Many are just ignorant.

[kevabuc]

but civilizations prey on the human need for security by using religion as a means to control them.  In theory, we enter into a "social contract" and agree to give up much of our freedom in exchange for that security.

Yet that same social contract theory can be the blueprint for totalitarianism. Do you think that substituting scientifiv knowledge for religion is immune from the same forces that can cause people to prey on one another?

[1sparkybuc]

Every day of my life I thank fictional heavenly being for the rational mind of George Carlin.

One George helped found this country. Another George nearly destroyed it. It's a sad world without George Carlin.

[SnookAU]

My personal belief, if anyone cares, is that "science" (the forces that control the cause and effect relationships in the universe) is God.

I really just meant that without money, there'd be no organized religions.

[Skull and Bones]

Freud argued that sex was what motivated human behavior.  I would argue it's the acquisition of power.  Sex, money, security, etc. all give one the sense of empowerment.  This paradigm is not an original thought of mine however.  I read a book called "The Path Not Taken: Reflections on Power and Fear" about 20 years ago by a psychiatrist named Alan Wheelis that really opened my eyes.

[Skull and Bones]

but civilizations prey on the human need for security by using religion as a means to control them. In theory, we enter into a "social contract" and agree to give up much of our freedom in exchange for that security.

Yet that same social contract theory can be the blueprint for totalitarianism. Do you think that substituting scientifiv knowledge for religion is immune from the same forces that can cause people to prey on one another?

probably not.

[GhostRider]

Freud argued that sex was what motivated human behavior.  I would argue it's the acquisition of power.  Sex, money, security, etc. all give one the sense of empowerment.  This paradigm is not an original thought of mine however.  I read a book called "The Path Not Taken: Reflections on Power and Fear" about 20 years ago by a psychiatrist named Alan Wheelis that really opened my eyes.

Power to do what?  Power in an of itself cannot be an end goal.  There has to be a use for power, or it's aquision makes no sense.  People aquire power in order to reproduce.

[1sparkybuc]

Freud argued that sex was what motivated human behavior.  I would argue it's the acquisition of power.  Sex, money, security, etc. all give one the sense of empowerment.  This paradigm is not an original thought of mine however.  I read a book called "The Path Not Taken: Reflections on Power and Fear" about 20 years ago by a psychiatrist named Alan Wheelis that really opened my eyes.

You misspelled Fred and he would the next to last one I would ask, George W. being the actual last.