• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Pushing Religion

Just ask any married men on this board and see if their wives are ok with them looking at pornography. By and large, it is very destructive to marriage relationships.

Well my husband doesn't post on this board so I'll answer for him. I'm quite okay with him looking at porn. In fact, it's not my favorite thing in the world but sometimes I enjoy it as well. I don't feel that it detracts from our sexual relationship with each other, and sometimes it actually enhances it.

Not everyone feels the same way. Coming from a somewhat conservative background myself I can understand that. However I believe many more women are comfortable with porn than you may suspect.
 
Wow, I am amazed. I don't even know what to say for the moment. The hostility to a belief in God in this thread is beyond what I imagined.

Hostile? No, I could care less whether someone believes in God, Allah, Budda, or Xenu, it's their actions and their attitudes toward others who don't share those beliefs that determine how critical I am of them. So no, I'm not "hostile" to a belief in God, I'm critical of the idea that you need a belief in God in order to be "moral" and I object to the idea of children being indoctrinated in beliefs they do not have the capacity to really understand yet.

Poor choice of words, I don't mean hostile towards me. I agree, it has been very civil. I just mean that when I throw an idea out there, I am just surprised at how easily it is summarily dismissed. And how quickly and totally the God-less ideas are supported.
That's because religion isn't needed for many of the things you describe.


I roll my eyes at that kind of thing to, but while it doesn't disprove the existence of a higher power, it does prove how contradictory the source material is, and how silly it is for fundamentalists to talk the way they do about the Bible being the absolute word of God which must be followed to the letter and so on and so forth. In that way it's just as fair for him to quote mine this as it was for you to quote mine something else to try to make your point about indoctrinating children, and how you saw it as wrong to not do so.


It doesn't "prove" anything, other than that the Judeo-Christian ideal of God probably is just that - an ideal. It also underlines the idea that God helps those who help themselves, which is to say instead of praying, one should get up off their ass and do something about their situation, but I digress.



What is "depraved" and "immoral" is in the eye of the beholder.



Heh, and just think, you're probably more optimistic about humanity in general that I am. :p


No, I don't see a problem with sexuality being more open and accessible. I also happen to like porn since I love women.

But while some things are going down, like morals in some instances, some things are going back up,
Morality is entirely subjective.

And to the other posters. The reason I assume bad experience with religion, is because most of the atheists I meet outside of this forum do cite horrible experiences with religion or a priest, etc as why they no longer believe.
I don't really have any "horrible" experiences, other than from being badgered by stuck-up religious types. Mostly the reason I stopped going along with religion was because there were too many logical flaws, and because the idea of sitting in church while someone tells you something you can read and interpret for yourself didn't make sense to me either.

Hey bro, respectfully, morality is in the eye of the beholder only if you do not believe in God. And if there is moral relativism there is no standard and no need for one. Some of us believe there is a need for one. We benefit and so does society.
 
[Major Payne]"I am not your damn brother!"[/Major Payne]

respectfully,
Right..... :shifty:

morality is in the eye of the beholder only if you do not believe in God.
Nope, still subjective, because even among Christians there are differing ideas of what morality is - that's part of why there are so many different sects of Christianity. Not to mention the child-raping priests, the cult leaders, and the holy wars - "That's right, I want you to love your neighbors as you love yourself, but kill all those motherfuckers over there."

And if there is moral relativism there is no standard and no need for one.
indeed3f41458sk6.jpg

No, really, there isn't a need for one since forcing your morality on others is a bad thing.

Some of us believe there is a need for one.
And a lot of people don't.

We benefit and so does society.
No, society really doesn't benefit from a bunch of religious busy-bodies forcing their beliefs on it or attempting to legislate their ideas of morality on it.
 
Just a second, me and my religious friends trying to legislate our values and morals is different from Atheists or other secular types who go to the courts and try to enforce their values on others?

not that I want to talk about prayer in school (I don't care, I am pretty ambivalent) , but to use it as an example, it was made illegal or unconstitutional because it supposedly violated the rights of kids who didn't want to pray.
But now the rights of kids who do want to pray are infringed.

just an example of when you push moral relativism, that is merely a different set of values and you are just doing the same thing you say religious busy bodies do.

Saying that what is immoral is subjective and insisting that everyone should think the same is at least as arrogant as any loud mouth Christian ;)
 
Just a second, me and my religious friends trying to legislate our values and morals is different from Atheists or other secular types who go to the courts and try to enforce their values on others?
Ever hear of anti-obsenity laws? You know, the ones that target pornography. Then of course there are the anti-same-sex marriage laws, anti-sodemy laws, laws that limit the number and type of sex toys one can own, anti-co-habitation laws, things of that nature. And you are honestly stacking up suits to enforce the establishment clause of our constitution against that?

not that I want to talk about prayer in school (I don't care, I am pretty ambivalent) , but to use it as an example, it was made illegal or unconstitutional because it supposedly violated the rights of kids who didn't want to pray.
Prayer organized by public schools was already and always has been unconsitutional, it's just unfortunately taken this long to enforce the establishment clause of the first amendment. So yes, it not only violated the rights of the children who did not want to pray, but it violated the rights of American taxpayers who did not want to establish Christianity in public schools funded with their tax dollars.

But now the rights of kids who do want to pray are infringed.
No, they aren't, because anyone can still pray in school if they really want to, it's just that the school cannot be any prayers or prayer sessions sanctioned or organized by the school in any way - that would be recognizing the establishment a religion. trust me, as long as there are tests, there will always be prayer in schools. ;)

just an example of when you push moral relativism, that is merely a different set of values and you are just doing the same thing you say religious busy bodies do.
No, I'm telling the religious busy-bodies to fuck off and leave well enough alone, which is not the same as forcing my moral beliefs on them. One is authoritarian and tyrannical, the other os libertarian.

Saying that what is immoral is subjective and insisting that everyone should think the same is at least as arrogant as any loud mouth Christian ;)
No, it's not. I don't understand how this is a difficult concept, but the only people being arrogant and telling others how to think are the ones going on about how there should be set moral standards that everyone must follow. Telling you to leave me alone and not tell me how to think is not the same as telling you how to think.
 
But you forget that as a society, we are all connected, and you enforcing your own morality is ridiculous. how can we operate if there is no common morality?
Law is morality. And making up your own morality is just an excuse to do whatever you want and try to escape consequences. You think they are not the same? But look at the results. Take prostitution for example. You may or may not like it, but let's say that it became legal in all 50 states and all the laws were repealed in the name of "telling you to leave me alone and not tell me how to think" Well now prostitution is legal and we as a society are left with all the consequences associated with that, most if not all of which are negative.

To say that there is no morality but my own, is to to trump the rule of law. What is lying or cheating then, if in my mind it is excusable? What is murder if in my mind it is justified? You already rationalize pornography and other sexual deviance, wait and see what else is next for others after you. When does "not telling me how to think" cross the line for you?
 
But you forget that as a society, we are all connected, and you enforcing your own morality is ridiculous.
I'm not enforcing my morality on anyone other than myself.

how can we operate if there is no common morality?
We have these things called laws, and they can actually work pretty well when they're based on logic and reason rather than the need to control people by shoving your own moral beliefs down their throat.

Law is morality.
No, law is cold, rational and heartless, at least when enforced properly and not based on someone's moronic sense of morality.

And making up your own morality is just an excuse to do whatever you want and try to escape consequences.
No, not really, I just have my own belief system and don't appreciate anyone forcing theirs on me. But if you think you can actually make a point about this based on reason and logic, by all means, surprise me.

You think they are not the same?
They aren't. One of the many problems in our system of law is that too many people like yourself can't see that.

Take prostitution for example. You may or may not like it, but let's say that it became legal in all 50 states and all the laws were repealed in the name of "telling you to leave me alone and not tell me how to think" Well now prostitution is legal and we as a society are left with all the consequences associated with that, most if not all of which are negative.
Only in your fearful mind. If protitution was legalized, prostitutes wouldn't have to work in dangerous areas and be in as much risk of getting killed, their health could be more well maintained (since that could be part of what it takes to do it legally), and they wouldn't have to constantly have to worry about paying off a pimp or being killed by them when they can't. And maybe some of that stigma could go away too, though I think there are too many prudes for that to happen very quickly.

To say that there is no morality but my own, is to to trump the rule of law.
I'd love to see you try to explain how that works. :wtf:

What is lying or cheating then, if in my mind it is excusable?
Ask the President.

What is murder if in my mind it is justified?
See, that would be a law based on logic and reason, ethics and other things a secular society could get behind without any need for religion or morality to justify it.

You already rationalize pornography and other sexual deviance, wait and see what else is next for others after you.
Is there some kind of a point here? Do tell.

When does "not telling me how to think" cross the line for you?
Complete anarchy. To eleborate further, let me explain that I view rights as extending to the point that they do not intrude on the rights of others.
 
Last edited:
haha! I am pretty optimistic, but a lot of things are getting worse.

I'm trying to reconcile the "I'm optimistic, but the world is a rapidly deteriorating writhing cesspool of depravity" opinion (my interpretation of some of the comments, not your words).

My main issue with it, apart from thinking the assessment is inaccurate, is that when you start thinking that no one is good, and the world is going to crap, you start placing less value in human life and society. If no one is a good person, is killing them that big a deal? If the rule of law is the product of a depraved populace, why should you be subject to it?

Conversely, if your society is passing laws you consider to be immoral or not beneficial, what incentive do you have to try and fix it? If people are in need of help, why should you care? They're not good people anyway.

That's the kind of belief that often leads to people who claim to value life yet support and even enjoy the death penalty, who seem to get almost a sense of glee at the prospect of being able to shoot someone who is committing a crime, who think nothing of supporting preemptive or unjust wars that kill numerous people on both sides, who endorse or participate directly in bigotry and the denial of rights to others simply for being different, and who are vehemently opposed to government programs designed to help those in need.

I see examples of these behaviors on a daily basis on this board and in public, generally from those people who are the most overt (and often the most "pushy") in declaring how religious they are. They embody the "talk the talk, but don't walk the walk" philosophy to me, as if simply being louder in your proclamation of righteousness makes up for not actually living a righteous life or caring for your fellow man.

Such a bleak outlook on life can also in extreme cases give rise to suicidal thoughts, and possibly with the combination of wanting to take other "bad" people with you as punishment or even to bring others with you to a "better place." The belief that no one is good and the world is a terrible place gives rise to suicide bombers / terrorists, people who go on mass shooting sprees, people who bomb abortion clinics, and people who murder homosexuals or other minorities. Religion is not the only source for people of this type of course, but this kind of depressing end-times-focused, humanity is inherently bad, looking forward to the next plane of existence rather than trying to live life to the fullest in this one type of thinking sure seems to spawn a lot of them.

Just to clarify, I'm not saying that you, the other two that I quoted, or Christians / religious people in general fall into the categories I listed over the previous several paragraphs, it's just a trend that tends to bother me and seems more of a product of an extremist end times / afterlife focused bit of cultism within Christianity and some other religions like Islam.

There are other Christians here and in public whose beliefs I understand and even admire (while not sharing the same beliefs myself). They use their faith as a source of strength and happiness, to help or support helping others, and they have a profound respect for life and their fellow human beings in the here and now. Some good examples of this on the board would be Jonathan Wally, Cultcross, Hoser, Captain Intrepid and J. Allen to name a few off the top of my head. That's the kind of religious belief I can get behind and think we need more of.

Pornography used to be a back alley kind of thing. Now I can find it at the click of the mouse. But then again, I bet some of you don't see the problem with that either.
That has nothing to do with declining morals, but rather greater access to and easier production of multimedia and changing attitudes towards the moral implications of fantasizing about sex. The interest in sex was always there and never went away regardless of era. If you consider pornography a sign of a declining society, who's the more desperate for porn, the guy who clicks a button and gets instant access to it, or the guy who has to go through all the trouble of acquiring and setting up an 8mm film reel to jerk off yet still does it? Lack of easy options either just made people give up on trying to get it or be more creative in how they acquired their porn, it didn't make them stop constantly thinking about sex though.

And you're right, I don't see the problem with pornography (so long as it's not something that involves exploting or harming others). What's wrong with not repressing your natural and allegedly God-given desires for personal enjoyment, so long as you're not harming anyone? If God didn't want you to be interested in sex, he sure had a funny way of showing it.

The reason I assume bad experience with religion, is because most of the atheists I meet outside of this forum do cite horrible experiences with religion or a priest, etc as why they no longer believe.
Speaking for myself, there was no "bad experience" per se, just a general distaste for some of the practicises of and dawning disbelief in some of the tenets of religion, about the time I started really thinking for myself instead of just parroting the beliefs of my parents (my dad mostly, my mom was never all that religious).

Originally Posted by Captain X
Originally Posted by Locutus of Bored
Reading your posts, I'm reminded that my one regret about turning away from religion as a teen was the boundless optimism, love of life and humanity, and pure happiness that my faith used to fill me with. I'm glad to see you guys still have that though.
Heh, and just think, you're probably more optimistic about humanity in general that I am. :p
I was actually being sarcastic about that part to try and contrast the more positive Christianity experienced during my youth where faith was considered a source of strength and happiness versus the negative doom and gloom fixated version that unfortunately seems to be practiced by many on this board and elsewhere. I wasn't trying to express any actual loss of optimism, happiness, and love of life on my part since losing my faith. I have become more of a smartass though, apparently. :lol:
 
how can we operate if there is no common morality?

We're all the same social apes, we're capable of empathy and we all know of concepts like happiness and suffering. I think a common morality can be pieced together from that, without needing to invoke anything supernatural.
 
And honestly, requiring a book to tell you "murder is wrong" really isn't a very high horse to be sitting on.
 
Last edited:
[/QUOTE]
Complete anarchy. To eleborate further, let me explain that I view rights as extending to the point that they do not intrude on the rights of others.[/QUOTE]

Very interesting view points. I don't understand the mentality on prostitution. Right now many women are put in harmful situations because of it, so if we legalized it, it would solve our problems and then we could regulate it. So that now we can pay women for sex in the open and without shame, because it is perfectly legitimate and healthy behavior!!! :confused:

A wise old scholar from centuries past (can't remember his name off the top of my head) once said, that their are two freedoms, the false one where man can do what he wants, and the true one where man does what he ought.

I think that applies in this discussion. You want everyone to do what they want, as long as it doesn't "infringe on the rights of others", the problem with that is, we all have a social/societal responsibility to each other.

Statistics show that children of single mothers are much more likely to involved with crime and a host of other delinquencies. A single mother usually comes from a man deciding to not be responsible and stay with his family, or his doing what he wants and not what he ought. Society receives the negative results.

So sure, you can view pornography, and forget that it is linked to sexual crime and divorce and spousal abuse (despite what a couple of posters here have said)

So let's have prostitution, forgetting the fact that it is an easy way to spread STD's and infidelity and is dangerous to women.

So let's let people do what they want out of the name of freedom and choice and let's watch as we continue to pretend that we have no responsibility or accountability to each other.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top