The root of ALL evil: religion?

Canada
June 20, 2007 10:13am CST
i saw this pretty sick documentary on the evils of religion hosted by Richard Dawkins http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9002284641446868316&q=Richard+Dawkins+the+root+of+all+evil&total=50&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1 thats the link you can go to see it if it doesnt work search "the root of all evil" in googlevideo what do you think about the arguments made in this video? how do you feel about it?
2 people like this
2 responses
@pallidyne (858)
• United States
20 Jun 07
Stating only that "There is no substantial proof that God exists." he continually belittles those who have any form of faith stating that they are all 'delusional'. This is a serious case of the intolerant 'humanist-athiest' pot calling the intolerant 'religious follower' kettle black. This strikes me as hypocritical in the extreme. He speaks on how things must be established by evidence, and then makes assumptions as to what 'must have happened' due to his reasoning. This is clear in his analysis of the Pope, having not disproven the theory that God exists and may or may not talk to the Pope, states that he KNOWS anything revealed to him was simply reasoned out of private thoughts. I'm not Catholic, nor do I follow what the Pope teaches, but I wasn't there and can't say that God wasn't either. I find it interesting that the theory of evolution is "what really happened", not science's current theory as to what may have led to the complexities of life. This demonstrates an example of 'faith' that he so dramatically derides. It is a 'faith' in the conclusions that have been presented that fit many of the facts discovered.
1 person likes this
• Canada
20 Jun 07
i too feel that dawkins comes on a bit strong, but thats the best way to get his message across. the problem with this is religous people who listen to him seem to get even more ignorant and close their minds off. the thing about faith that you described is incorrect. science is an exchange between theories and tests. these theories are made for evidence. the problem with the idea of god is that the theory comes from no evidence and cant be tested. evolution on the other hand can. thats why you cant compare what all scientists say.
2 people like this
• United States
21 Jun 07
Actually evolution cannot be completely proven without the use of a time machine. It is still a theory until then. Aside from the complete lack of missing links (except the frauds that pop up periodically long enough to get famous enough to be disproven.) Piltdown man, a personal favorite. It "proved" evolution too.
• Canada
21 Jun 07
yea, the theory of gravity cant be proven without a time machine either.. also, guess who were the people that discovered that these things were frauds? evolutionists. why? because they were the ones studying it. and there micro-evolution has been proven. many people don't believe in macro evolution. but the thing is, many people don't realize that if micro evolution happens enough times, the product would be a lot different from the input. its called adaptation.
2 people like this
@vivienna (582)
• Venezuela
20 Jun 07
Thanks for that link. Dawkes is very aptly in his cruzade against 'religion', as if all religions were the same, and all, necessarily, would lead to evil. The problem is that what is called "religion" is a term as vague and adaptable as it is "politics". You can be religious for good as you can be political for good. Would anybody deny that politics is the root of all evil? But neither "politics" not "religion" in itself are good or bad, they are what men make of them. Imagine a documentary about the good Christians have brought on the world through the centuries: how many hospitals, nurseries, asylums, care for the poor... resumes in the word: Christian charity. From mediaeval attention of leprosy to Mother Theresa in Calcutta, who would have done this but for the love of Christ? But as sure as people do extraordinary things in imitation of our Lord, as sure is that even the noblest intentions are abused by those who take religion as a pretext to further their ambitions for power and their economical greed. But then, this is exactly contrary to true religion of all kind!
• Canada
20 Jun 07
Politics are the activities of government. religion is a set of attitudes, beliefs, and practices pertaining to supernatural power. whats so hard to get? and i could argue that the good things religion has done is just a way of converting people, just as the bad things they have done. its all about conversion, more people, more power, more money, more conversions, and the cycle goes on and on snowballing into a great mass that can trample anything, including mankind. lol.
2 people like this
@vivienna (582)
• Venezuela
21 Jun 07
What do you mean by "politics are the activities of government" and "religion is a set of attitudes, beliefs and practice pertaining to supernatural power? Religion is as man made as politics are man made. Government and its politics are an expression of human will, of attitudes, beliefs and practice, and not only in democracy. Religion is the human intent to reach and to influence the supernatural. It is much more rational to blame politics -human made- for its evil outcome, than the supreme God for human shortcoming! It is the abuse of religion by politics, which does evil!
• United States
21 Jun 07
In reading your comments, it makes me think that Atheism has learned too well the tactics and lessons from fanatical branches of religions. With something like this, they end up having to embrace all the things that they supposedly abhorr--- With their need to destroy religion, they take away that right they claim to preserve, the right to think and to choose, if the choice to follow a religion is then taken away. Its paradoxical on many layers, but the use of 'strong methods' like this which are 'the best way to get the message across' seems to tell me that they have embraced the fanatical approach, since that apparently is the only thing that does work. I love being called "more ignorant", don't you?