Religion

cbayer

(146,218 posts)

4. What part of the article do you hope is wrong?

Mon Apr 27, 2015, 11:06 AM

Apr 2015

While much of the opposition has come from religion, religious groups have also been positive activists in the GLBT civil rights movement in the US, as well as many of the other causes that you mention.

I think the disaffiliation is a factor, as the religious institutions have not changed in ways that their members have, but the nones are actively seeking other ways of being religious and forming different kinds of religious groups.

Let's stand with and support the religious people and groups that are doing the right thing and oppose together those that are not.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

95 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The Future of Religion Is Ascendant [View all] cbayer Apr 2015 OP

... trotsky Apr 2015 #1

"The search for meaning is eternal" Bullshit. Only if people presuppose a desginer to impart AtheistCrusader Apr 2015 #2

We have incredibly complex forms of life on earth - jonno99 Apr 2015 #7

The biggest problem with the faulty "argument from design" you are attempting to make... trotsky Apr 2015 #8

Perhaps I wasn't clear - my apologies. jonno99 Apr 2015 #14

But *how* do we know the cell phone is designed? trotsky Apr 2015 #16

Because I am familiar with the process of manufacturing. jonno99 Apr 2015 #20

Ah, so the phone is complex compared to the environment you found it in? n/t trotsky Apr 2015 #23

No, the phone IS complex - and has a known designer. jonno99 Apr 2015 #26

Which is more complex - the phone or a blade of grass? n/t trotsky Apr 2015 #27

It depends doesn't it? jonno99 Apr 2015 #29

It certainly does depend. trotsky Apr 2015 #44

My question is: if the phone required a designer - why not the grass? jonno99 Apr 2015 #46

You still haven't answered why you think the phone AND the grass need a designer. trotsky Apr 2015 #49

Sorry, if I've mucked up my argument jonno99 Apr 2015 #54

And logically, if complex life needs a designer... trotsky Apr 2015 #55

I disagree. It is not simply my assertion that complexity begs a designer - jonno99 Apr 2015 #62

Ah but your reasoning is not consistent. trotsky Apr 2015 #64

I have no special knowledge; the phone designer and the blade of grass *may* have jonno99 Apr 2015 #65

On what do you base that belief? trotsky Apr 2015 #66

It's all about origins - I don't accept "chance" as a ratianale explanation. jonno99 Apr 2015 #69

Well that seems to be a completely arbitrary and personal declaration, now doesn't it? trotsky Apr 2015 #71

So, I logged onto DU this afternoon... Act_of_Reparation Apr 2015 #22

Shhh, I'm not done playing with my new toy yet. n/t trotsky Apr 2015 #24

We aren't nil desperandum Apr 2015 #18

I aggree. jonno99 Apr 2015 #25

Why are you asking me to design something, to disprove creationism? AtheistCrusader Apr 2015 #15

Does my reply to trotsky answer your question? jonno99 Apr 2015 #17

No, it just doubles down on the logical disconnect. AtheistCrusader Apr 2015 #21

Of course. But you're asking me to accept jonno99 Apr 2015 #42

No, because I have a reasonable life span of about a million hours or so. AtheistCrusader Apr 2015 #43

Watchmaker argument phil89 Apr 2015 #28

Don't forget a stupendously complex... Binkie The Clown Apr 2015 #30

Is there a designer? The answer is yes or no. jonno99 Apr 2015 #32

But who designed the designer? Binkie The Clown Apr 2015 #33

A better question: jonno99 Apr 2015 #35

So you're ok with not phil89 Apr 2015 #34

Thing is, I DO understand a lot about the origins of life. Binkie The Clown Apr 2015 #38

If we're discussing the origins of life, I would make the argument that jonno99 Apr 2015 #41

Straw man Binkie The Clown Apr 2015 #45

You made the claim jonno99 Apr 2015 #48

Whatever. Binkie The Clown Apr 2015 #50

Why are you continuing to ask for evidence of creationism to disprove creationism? AtheistCrusader Apr 2015 #68

I gave no indication that I'm *ok* with not understanding, jonno99 Apr 2015 #39

if the complexity of life points to a designer Binkie The Clown Apr 2015 #47

I take it very seriously - my life may depend on it. jonno99 Apr 2015 #52

We have two explanations about the origin of god: 1) chance 2) design Binkie The Clown Apr 2015 #53

The alternative to my "irrationality" is to accept that jonno99 Apr 2015 #56

Is a complex god possible by chance? Binkie The Clown Apr 2015 #61

Pls see my #62 n/t jonno99 Apr 2015 #63

In other words: You still refuse to answer my question. Binkie The Clown Apr 2015 #67

Sorry, I thought your question was rhetorical. jonno99 Apr 2015 #70

Then, the answer to your question: Binkie The Clown Apr 2015 #74

Are you aware of 'emergent behaviors?' immoderate Apr 2015 #51

Who or what then designed the designer? Fumesucker Apr 2015 #37

Pls see my #32 & #35 jonno99 Apr 2015 #40

a creationist? Lordquinton Apr 2015 #72

you are messing up two arguments. Warren Stupidity Apr 2015 #85

It is certainly not my intent jonno99 Apr 2015 #89

Seriously. Did you not read a single fucking thing Warren wrote? Act_of_Reparation Apr 2015 #90

You're right, I should have addressed this sentence: jonno99 Apr 2015 #91

Now we're onto straw men. Act_of_Reparation Apr 2015 #92

Your first full para is all true. Your last? Not so helpful... jonno99 Apr 2015 #93

Let me ask you a question: Act_of_Reparation May 2015 #94

No, because you have failed to fully describe the robin before comparing. rug May 2015 #95

People who make their own meaning aren't searching for meaning? I don't get it. n/t LTX Apr 2015 #31

No, I'm not. AtheistCrusader Apr 2015 #36

Meaning what? rug Apr 2015 #57

Whatever you want. AtheistCrusader Apr 2015 #58

That was a joke. rug Apr 2015 #59

I know. AtheistCrusader Apr 2015 #60

I do hope nil desperandum Apr 2015 #3

What part of the article do you hope is wrong? cbayer Apr 2015 #4

Support nil desperandum Apr 2015 #5

What do you imagine those sub-groups who are fighting for causes you support cbayer Apr 2015 #9

Will they give up and stop fighting because they read a comment critical about religion... trotsky Apr 2015 #11

That's great as our climate changes, as our planet loses the ability to support us Leontius Apr 2015 #76

You've got this all wrong. Climate change is entirely due to religion. cbayer Apr 2015 #78

Has anyone made a single claim suggesting that, cbayer? trotsky Apr 2015 #80

Opposition to birth control certainly is not helpful. Warren Stupidity Apr 2015 #86

Maybe nil desperandum Apr 2015 #79

Or maybe he was making the point that you can't blame everything on religion cbayer Apr 2015 #81

And if anyone did that, it would be one hell of a legitimate point. trotsky Apr 2015 #82

No, but she's not the first poster here to claim skepticscott Apr 2015 #84

Bullies will be bullies. trotsky Apr 2015 #87

LMFAO!!!! "much" of the opposition???? trotsky Apr 2015 #6

It comes down to birth rates; compare this and the accompanying Dennett article muriel_volestrangler Apr 2015 #10

Agree that the predicted changes appear to be almost entirely due to birth rates. cbayer Apr 2015 #12

It also behooves us to try and remove some of its power and influence... trotsky Apr 2015 #13

The search to fit reality to presumptions is indeed eternal... MellowDem Apr 2015 #19

The search for meaning is eternal, says Emilie M. Townes, dean of the Vanderbilt Divinity School aka-chmeee Apr 2015 #73

I see no similarity whatsoever. cbayer Apr 2015 #75

Both are versions of skepticscott Apr 2015 #88

Is it too early for a 'because we're going to launch it into the sun' joke yet? just checking. AtheistCrusader Apr 2015 #77

I would say this claim would only hold true if the economic conditions in most countries... Humanist_Activist Apr 2015 #83