A Powerful Voice Of Reason

[mwight]

rIZWDyMLGIQ

[genmaicha]

The danger is that people rely upon intermediaries to contact God or interpret his will instead of doing it themselves.

[Trunk]

Good clip.

[Ryan T.]

Good clip.

 

I do agree with some of the points that he makes but unfortunately he is not a seeker and chooses to dismiss all religions of the world as being the root of all evil. Just as many "fundamentalist" types are not open to ideas, Bill Maher seems to be just as closed off from alternative ideas. Especially considering he got a lot of those people to talk to him based on the falsehood that he was exploring the ideas of the different faiths. When in reality he was only out to prove his own predetermined agenda. Very "Borat" of him!

[mwight]

I do agree with some of the points that he makes but unfortunately he is not a seeker and chooses to dismiss all religions of the world as being the root of all evil. Just as many "fundamentalist" types are not open to ideas, Bill Maher seems to be just as closed off from alternative ideas. Especially considering he got a lot of those people to talk to him based on the falsehood that he was exploring the ideas of the different faiths. When in reality he was only out to prove his own predetermined agenda. Very "Borat" of him!

 

 

I'm against faith of any kind, instead I think we should all strive to make sure our beliefs are well grounded in personal experiences and hard evidence. He doesn't seem to go after religions that don't rely on faith like Buddhism.

[Ryan T.]

I'm against faith of any kind, instead I think we should all strive to make sure our beliefs are well grounded in personal experiences and hard evidence. He doesn't seem to go after religions that don't rely on faith like Buddhism.

 

But he sure does like to interview extremists in order to "prove" his points.

[Goddodin]

But he sure does like to interview extremists in order to "prove" his points.

 

 

yeah, while I agree with some of the points he makes I can't help feeling his approach - or the approach of someone like Dawkins - is somewhat akin to interviewing BNP activists and concluding that all Brits are racist c**ts.

[jaloo]

excellent video.

[Aetherous]

There is a quiet truth that inspires the religions of the world. That can never be diminished or shut up...but it'd be a good thing if the loud lies that comprise/compromise the religions of the world are shut up and diminished.

 

All of these religious people miss the point entirely.

 

...and I don't consider this guy to be a good voice of reason. Real reason is more open minded.

Edited December 26, 2008 by Scotty

[teopakees]

rIZWDyMLGIQ

 

Humanist messiah Maher in proclaiming his prophecy commits the exact sin he condemns; blind addherance to the words of another. Yes,-people- have gotten the message wrong but the message(the bottom line of scripture is Love) is true.

[mwight]

Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense.

-Buddha

 

Humanist messiah Maher in proclaiming his prophecy commits the exact sin he condemns; blind addherance to the words of another.

 

Who's words is he blindly adhering to?

[teopakees]

Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense.

-Buddha

Who's words is he blindly adhering to?

The humanist party line. Some, humanists I have spoken with would not be un-happy if people of faith or spirit were behind fences topped with barbed wire.

[mwight]

The humanist party line. Some, humanists I have spoken with would not be un-happy if people of faith or spirit were behind fences topped with barbed wire.

 

Faith is the problem here, just accepting something as true when you have no experience or evidence to support it. If you can convince a person some made up lie is true, on faith, you can get them to do anything. Ramming planes into buildings, burning witches at the stake, if they're willing to accept something on faith you have them under your control, their mind is your's for the taking.

 

That's the problem, faith allows otherwise rational people to believe and do absolutely insane things. Most people would even agree with that statement as long as its out of a religious context. Lets say you go to a used car lot, and see a really good deal on a newer car. You ask to test drive it, but your told you can't drive it or even pop the hood until AFTER you buy the car. The car sales man tells you just to have faith that its a good buy and take his word its a good car. No rational or semi-rational person would buy that car. Most people wouldn't buy a car on faith, or anything else that really mattered in real life, but yet they're willing to accept answers to the most important questions in life on faith. Faith indeed can and does lead to psychosis, I've seen it first hand. It's a plague on our world and on our minds, like a socially acceptable heroine.

 

iCh2FXzD6R4

 

 

 

Not having faith doesn't mean you can't believe in God, it doesn't mean you can't be spiritual. It means you must seek and find your own answers within, based on your own experiences and the evidence you have available to you. Granted thats a lot harder to do than just picking up a book, and listening to your preacher and your friends and family, but its necessary. True knowledge of God is never going to be found in a book, its only within. Everything else that has been written down is just the words of men.

Edited December 26, 2008 by mwight

[Ryan T.]

Faith is the problem here, just accepting something as true when you have no experience or evidence to support it. If you can convince a person some made up lie is true, on faith, you can get them to do anything. Ramming planes into buildings, burning witches at the stake, if they're willing to accept something on faith you have them under your control, their mind is your's for the taking.

 

Although I see the point you are trying to make I have to disagree with your examples. Just as Maher tries to use religious extremists to "prove" his points.

 

Ramming planes into buildings had nothing to with religion. Sure it was put under the guise of religion. Ultimately if those 9/11 attackers had the opportunity to work and find contentment/self-respect in their home countries they would have never been so disenfranchised that they would act out in such a way. And in an even larger context, I don't believe any of the "jihadists" that have been so news-worthy of recent years have anything to do with religion. They just want to turn the clock back 1,000 years. It is really more about control than anything else. And a person might say "but if it weren't for religion they wouldn't have been able to manipulate such hopeless, disenfranchised peoples", but that also can be said about vice, politics and the military.

 

Same thing with burning witches at the stake. Those women were either killed because they were talking lunacy(ergot growing on their bread) or because they were women that might speak their minds(an affront to the Church).

 

So it can be said religion and faith is the problem but these things are not isolated to religion. IMO, it is more about power and control.

[mwight]

Ramming planes into buildings had nothing to with religion.

 

It had to do with faith, and being brainwashed into doing insane things via that faith.

 

Same thing with burning witches at the stake. Those women were either killed because they were talking lunacy(ergot growing on their bread) or because they were women that might speak their minds(an affront to the Church).

 

Sorry no thats just wrong, usually it was the accusers who were on the ergot. Also frequently people were accused of witchcraft to have their land and property seized by those in control. No conflict of interest there, kind of like our modern drug war, but I digress.

 

Also you fail to miss the point completely. The whole society at the time accepted it was ok to kill witches based on their(the puritan's) faith. They came over here to achieve religious freedom from the church of england and turned around and burned people because supposedly they were pagan. And they did so because of their faith, they were able to justify their deaths as necessary and acceptable.

 

Exodus 22:18 Revised English Bible: You must not allow a witch to live.

 

If you can justify killing or even accept others in your community openly killing another person because of faith/religion, your ape shit crazy theres no debating it.

 

Let's not forget the Spanish inquisition, or how the native peoples sacrificed humans to their god's.

 

The point I'm making is when people start going off the edge and believing things they have seen any evidence for, and had no experience with, then they are insane, if you keep going down that road eventually you wind up killing others who don't believe exactly like you.

 

I'm not against people being spiritual or believing in God, I am against people giving up their minds to external authority. I don't care if they come to an opinion or conclusion that is different than mine, only how they came up with that conclusion. Does that make sense?

Edited December 26, 2008 by mwight

[rookie]

Yep, Maher is really trying to persuade you to accept his point of view.

No doubt that some "religious" fanatics are very dangerous becasue of what they believe. It is not religion itself that would lead to violence and destruction like Maher is suggesting, but the content of their beliefs.

Plenty of examples are out there.

Quakers. How about our own Mak_Tin_Si? no doubt he practices a religion.

 

Tibetan Budists today, early Christians before 300 AD, the examples of religious people being persecuted and not reacting with violence are out there.

 

For some, a set of beliefs called a religion, can be a very useful and helpful tool. (Mak_Tin_Si as an example)

A case could be made that each of us has our own religion consisting of our beliefs about life, death, meaning, causal relationships, or just how things work. These beliefs are there whether they are assumed, borrowed, picked up by conformity, or conciously chosen.

 

Also, how many of you caught Maher's assertion that you cannot possibly know something about what happens to you after you die because he does not?

Very high impression of himself I would say

[mwight]

Yep, Maher is really trying to persuade you to accept his point of view.

No doubt that some "religious" fanatics are very dangerous becasue of what they believe. It is not religion itself that would lead to violence and destruction like Maher is suggesting, but the content of their beliefs.

Plenty of examples are out there.

Quakers. How about our own Mak_Tin_Si? no doubt he practices a religion.

 

Tibetan Budists today, early Christians before 300 AD, the examples of religious people being persecuted and not reacting with violence are out there.

 

For some, a set of beliefs called a religion, can be a very useful and helpful tool. (Mak_Tin_Si as an example)

A case could be made that each of us has our own religion consisting of our beliefs about life, death, meaning, causal relationships, or just how things work. These beliefs are there whether they are assumed, borrowed, picked up by conformity, or conciously chosen.

 

Also, how many of you caught Maher's assertion that you cannot possibly know something about what happens to you after you die because he does not?

Very high impression of himself I would say

 

I'd be very interested to see Maher undertake some training in meditation, and energy work. Let him have a true OBE, as a results of his efforts, I wonder how that would change his attitude.

[Ryan T.]

The point I'm making is when people start going off the edge and believing things they have seen any evidence for, and had no experience with, then they are insane, if you keep going down that road eventually you wind up killing others who don't believe exactly like you.

 

I'm not against people being spiritual or believing in God, I am against people giving up their minds to external authority. I don't care if they come to an opinion or conclusion that is different than mine, only how they came up with that conclusion. Does that make sense?

 

I absolutely agree. But my point is that it is not the religions fault. It has everything to do with people manipulating the religion for their own, generally selfish, purposes.

 

It is my firm belief that the religions of the world on balance have resulted in more peace, happiness and harmony than not. I do not believe Maher would be open to seeing the possibility those good things as it contradicts the faith he has in his own ideas.

[mwight]

I absolutely agree. But my point is that it is not the religions fault. It has everything to do with people manipulating the religion for their own, generally selfish, purposes.

 

It is my firm belief that the religions of the world on balance have resulted in more peace, happiness and harmony than not. I do not believe Maher would be open to seeing the possibility those good things as it contradicts the faith he has in his own ideas.

 

I'm not against religion, I'm against faith.

 

That being said if it was mandatory that every child in the world have a critical thinking class every year they were in school, to teach them not to believe things on faith but instead on good solid evidence or inner experiences, then I don't think many religions could survive.

 

I don't believe it is the fault of religion itself, only that people accept things as absolute truth on faith alone.

Faith not religion is the problem.

 

Thats just my $0.02

[Ryan T.]

That being said if it was mandatory that every child in the world have a critical thinking class every year they were in school, to teach them not to believe things on faith but instead on good solid evidence or inner experiences, then I don't think many religions could survive.

 

Just as I think that sword-fighting should be mandatory for high school graduation. If everyone carried a sword and did not know what level another was at, I think the world would be a safer place.

 

Unfortunately, many people have "inner experiences" based on faith. You look at George Bush. He was asked why he believed in Jesus. His answer was something like "because he changed my heart". Which considering his hellion youth is probably a good thing. Now here's the rub. I think George Bush is a good Christian...at heart. Overall I think he is probably a decent person. Unfortunately, for us(and the Iraqis) he is suffering from PTSD from 9/11 that it has separated him from his more compassionate self. That coupled with the fact that he surrounded himself with power-hungry manipulators has led to a perfect storm of faith gone wrong.

 

So even "inner experiences" can be twisted.

 

I like to see people following the principles of their religion as their focus rather than pointing out what others should or should not be doing. Personal karma vs. unbending dogma.

 

And unfortunately religion and faith cannot be unwound from each other. Even in Buddhism you have to have faith that your practice will lead to a goal(contentedness, a quiet mind or whatever).

[mwight]

Just as I think that sword-fighting should be mandatory for high school graduation. If everyone carried a sword and did not know what level another was at, I think the world would be a safer place.

 

Unfortunately, many people have "inner experiences" based on faith. You look at George Bush. He was asked why he believed in Jesus. His answer was something like "because he changed my heart". Which considering his hellion youth is probably a good thing. Now here's the rub. I think George Bush is a good Christian...at heart. Overall I think he is probably a decent person. Unfortunately, for us(and the Iraqis) he is suffering from PTSD from 9/11 that it has separated him from his more compassionate self. That coupled with the fact that he surrounded himself with power-hungry manipulators has led to a perfect storm of faith gone wrong.

 

So even "inner experiences" can be twisted.

 

I like to see people following the principles of their religion as their focus rather than pointing out what others should or should not be doing. Personal karma vs. unbending dogma.

 

And unfortunately religion and faith cannot be unwound from each other. Even in Buddhism you have to have faith that your practice will lead to a goal(contentedness, a quiet mind or whatever).

 

 

I don't think were talking about the same thing at all. Lets say a person is agnostic, and has a mystical experience or a true out of body experience, or something of that magnitude. I'd say that person is justified if in changing their world view.

 

 

With Christians like Bush, Who needs enemies? He's wiped almost a million humans lives off the face of the planet, I've read stories of peoples weddings being bombed and the whole family being killed except for a few members. I'd like you to sit down with one of those family members who had to watch his whole family slaughtered and ask if you still believe Bush is a good Christian...

 

Saying Jesus healed your heart isn't the same thing as having a genuine mystical experience.

 

Also faith that you will achieve your goal for practice really isn't faith, its more like a hope.

 

Experiencing the divine through meditation isn't the same as just believing the teachings of a religion because a book or another person says so.

Edited December 26, 2008 by mwight

[Ryan T.]

I don't think were talking about the same thing at all. Lets say a person is agnostic, and has a mystical experience or a true out of body experience, or something of that magnitude. I'd say that person is justified if in changing their world view.

With Christians like Bush, Who needs enemies? He's wiped almost a million humans lives off the face of the planet, I've read stories of peoples weddings being bombed and the whole family being killed except for a few members. I'd like you to sit down with one of those family members who had to watch his whole family slaughtered and ask if you still believe Bush is a good Christian...

 

Saying Jesus healed your heart isn't the same thing as having a genuine mystical experience.

 

Also faith that you will achieve your goal for practice really isn't faith, its more like a hope.

 

Experiencing the divine through meditation isn't the same as just believing the teachings of a religion because a book or another person says so.

 

Who are we to say that George Bush's spiritual experiences are more or less than anyone else's spiritual experiences? I said he was a good Christian at heart. All people go off track for one reason or another at some point. Don't think I am justifying what he has done. But just because you may not like his actions or what he stands for does not in any way invalidate his spiritual experiences.

 

And from some of my Christian friends, considering who they were before they became Christians, I'd have to say they had genuine mystical experiences. And they and the world are better off for it. Who are we to judge?

 

And I think we start to split hairs when we put faith vs. hope. They are not too far apart, if at all.

[Pero]

"Plain fact is religion must die, for mankind to live."

 

You call that voice of reason, I call it voice of crap.

[Aetherous]

"Plain fact is religion must die, for mankind to live."

 

You call that voice of reason, I call it voice of crap.

 

Word. It's pseudo-rationality.

[Fitz P. Faustus]

faith is not an enemy, it is not the driving force of ignorance or violence. religion is an excuse for these things and faith in a man's word vs that of a god is what causes ignorance. faith within its own nature is what drives humanity in any direction we cannot under any circumstances be absent of it. examples that come to mind after reading this are; the Tao which we believe is some kind of force that is all, i really cant put it into better words than that. buddhism, a religion that relies on the faith that Siddartha was in fact the buddha. science relies on the faith that the universe is made up of laws that can be tested through trial and error, that everything can be explained one way or the other. of course the other various religions usually rely on prophets speaking for gods, but this isn't different from what you believe in, taoists have Lao Tzu buddhists with the Buddha and science with thousands of their own brand of prophets who confess truths that can never be contested.

 

i will agree with the statement "look at yourself in the mirror" because we all need to do that. before attacking faith think to yourself, how many people killed each other before organised religion sprang up? if you get angry and hurt someone, kill them even, i will guarantee that will will love it. its human nature to hurt, to kill, its only our faith that its wrong that makes us feel bad afterwards.