Thank you for your comment Jais, but I'm afraid I have to respectfully disagree with nearly all your points;
"Anything can be rationalized, even belief in God. Any god. If you think rationally then you'd realize that you have no idea what happens when you die. You BELIEVE that you will simply cease to be but there will never be a way to be sure. If you were to think about it rationally, then belief in a god is nothing more than hedging your bets."
It's not necessarily true that believing in god would hedge your bets. For a start it assumes that if you have evidence that believing in a god is more likely to ensure you a better deal than not. For example if there were a god, for all we know believing in the wrong god could equally get you sent to hell just as much as not believing in one. It also assumes "that hedging your bets" in this way is the "rational" thing to do, which isn't necessarily the case.
"If you thought about it rationally you'd realize that if people ceased faith in God that would only end violence in the name of religion. There would still be violence in the name of greed, nationality, and plain old crazy. Those who cause violence in God's name would simply cause violence for any other reason. Taking God out of the way changes the excuses you use without really curing the true disease."
I agree that all violence and nastiness in the world is down to religion, but I would argue that a good portion of it is. If nothing else it makes it easier. Saying that it isn't the only problem doesn't make it any less of a problem. That's like saying if you could wave a magic wand and bring peace to Iraq you shouldn't because its not the only violence in the world. The author of the statement above is simple making the point that without religion there would be less violence than there is with religion.
"Anything can be rationalized, immorality can be easily accommodated. You think gang violence, rape and theft are done because someone didn't rationalize it first? The first thing someone does before robbing a bank is to convince himself that he is more deserving of other peoples money. There is just as much crime committed by cold calculation as there is by passions and faith.
Wars based on faith were started by such rational men who used faith, social standing and money to win the peoples hearts. All for land and greed. You honestly believe that all the holy wars in the world were made just over differing faiths? No faith has been used by the powerful and rational as a tool for tens of centuries."
I think we have some wires crossed here. To convince yourself that you are more deserving of someone else's money than them is illogical and more importantly irrational. Secondly to make the decision to take that money by violence or cruelty is also an irrational decision. You could argue here with the meaning of "rationality" but bear in mind the definition is usually along the lines of;
"Rationality as a term is related to the idea of reason, a word which following Webster's may be derived as much from older terms referring to thinking itself as from giving an account or an explanation. This lends the term a dual aspect. One aspect associates it with comprehension, intelligence, or inference, particularly when an inference is drawn in ordered ways (thus a syllogism is a rational argument in this sense). The other part associates rationality with explanation, understanding or justification, particularly if it provides a ground or a motive. 'Irrational', therefore, is defined as that which is not endowed with reason or understanding."
"The problem is those of us who are rational and have no faith or feelings are doomed to shed themselves of all morality. While who hold onto faith without logic become madmen as well. Also faith is not an emotion anymore than logic is. Those of us who live for our emotions become addicts searching for their next high, they don't go to church when church tells them their excess is unholy."
I really must take exception here. The suggestion that simple because I have no faith that I am without morality is not only ridiculous its also mildly offensive. I'd would in fact argue that without the shackles of faith I have become more open to thinking about the root of ethics and morality, and that my personal ethical code is more developed and inclusive than the average religious believer who is happy to accept there own moral code direct from a dusty tome without thought.
"The problem is not with faith versus logic or emotion. The problem lies with humans as a whole.
If you think carving God out of humanity will save us your just wrong. Only the truth can save you. You cannot know the whole truth if you cut away faith, or emotion. Both are apart of us as humans, we have searched for God since the dawn of our species. Each of us search for love to fulfill our emotional needs and we use logic to find that which we search for. You are correct, in that many atrocities have been carved into history in the name of God, but you miss the whole truth in that many atrocities were built by the hands of the rational as well."
Once again atheists do not argue that religion is the entire problem of humanity. We simple argue that it is a problem, and one that can not simple be ignored. Id also like to repeat the fact that a healthy, rational human who thinks about their actions and effect on the world will not perform atrocities. Faith stifles rationality. You argue that you cannot know truth without faith, I'd argue that you cannot know truth with faith. One definition of faith is "Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence" , if your happy with faith you don't need truth.
"You should also remember that religion and God built this nation that gives you the freedom to say such things.
Fraid not! Firstly I'm English and happy to say that we are an overwhelmingly secular country, and while I'd agree that religion has played its part in the history of dear old England it certainly did not build this country, and certainly has not contributed to freedom in its time. Plenty of people have burned in our history for saying something religion did not like. On top of that... if anything we started of as Pagans, so strictly speaking you should say "Gods built this nation".
Now I'm guessing you in fact made the false assumption that I am American. If this were true you'd still be wrong, if anything America was built on rationalism by secularists;
the Treaty of Tripoli Article 11, it states:
"As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion"
For more information about the secular nature of America's birth this site seems to be a nice collection, but you'll find information from many other sources. However as with England I will of course accept its had its part in Americas history, but its certainly not the key player in terms of freedom, free speech, and certainly has been far from entirely positive.
"Religion and God have saved billions of lives here on earth just by giving regular Joe's a set of moral principals to guide them long before government's grew powerful enough to enforce them as law. God grants us peace when we pass on into the unknown. "
I again respectfully disagree. You assume that the default state without religion or government is immorality cruelty and murder. This is simple not the case as we can see in our evolutionary relatives. Also I have to say I worry about you as a person if the only reason you don't murder, torture, rape and steal is because you're terrified of a spanking from god or government.
"After all your life when you still want to live one more day can you say that you find no comfort in faith that you will continue? "
To live for all eternity sounds like it could be a bit of a downer to me, but its fair to say I might want to live a little longer. Unfortunately I'll have to accept the fact that in all probability this is our one shot at existence, and be happy with my time concious on this amazing world and the good I've done while I'm here.
"You would take all the good with the bad and change nothing for the better in return."
I'd argue that the bad of religion (the spread of irrationality, intolerance and immorality) easily outweighs any good it does.
"I don't care what you choose to believe but don't lay all the world's problems at the feet of people who believe differently than you..."
For the reasons why I do care what others choose to believe please see the original post (which you should note is not written by myself) which I think sums it up aptly.
"... we are ALL to blame for many reasons. We ALL created these horrors by our own hands."
Speak for yourself. I do my best every day to make the world a better place and do as little harm as I can while I'm here. I like to think I'm mostly succeeding, at least with the latter. While your statement is very poetic, it does not stand to reason that I am held responsible for the horrors in the world, past or present, or that anyone else is to blame for just being the same species of those who are. Sounds a little bit "Original Sin" to me, which is not only a disgusting concept, its just plain dumb.
Anyway thanks very much for your comment and look forward to any further reply. Apologies for spelling, grammar, punctuation and any rushed explanations. I should be revising :-S
