Comment Re:Oh, the irony (Score 1) 381
> you can't really say anything about someone based on what invisible sky ghost they worship.
Now, regardless of whatever else you said, that is a *REALLY* stupid thing to say.
Your religious views will basically define your behaviour.
Of course, I'm assuming that you actually mean someone's overall religious views, rather than simply which god they claim to worship; there's a big difference between Presbyterians, Anglicans, and Roman Catholics today, for example.. and almost just as big a difference between each of those now, and what each of those was like 400 years ago. I'm also talking about the views they *actually* have, as opposed to what they publically claim, if there's a difference.
In other words, what I am saying is, not only *can* you say something about someone based on their religious philosiphy (which is heavily based on which "invisible ghost in the sky" they worship), but you can say a *WHOLE FRIGGING LOT* about them.
For example, if I told you I believed in a god who required that I sacrifice (kill) my firstborn son, then you could pretty obviously say that my views conflicted (violently) with your own. Well, I hope, anyway :)
The difficult part isn't in making statements (or deductions, if you like) about someone based on what (or even simply in whom) they believe; it's in *figuring out* what (or in whome) they believe.
P.S. Of course, being as I'm a protestant.. somewhere in between Presbyterian and Evengelical.. I don't hapen to agree that most Roman Catholics (or Anglicans, or Jehovah's Witnesses, or Orthodox, etc) are actually worshipping the same God I am.
I say they're worshipping a made up god. In other words, as I said, it's not just which "invisible sky ghost" you *claim* to worship, it's which one you do.. because whoever you do worship (God, or any made up god, or nobody, to put it in my words) has a great impact on your whole outlook on life.. which of course has a great impact on your actions.
I think the same thing can be said about being an atheist, though to a lesser degree; there are various flavours of atheists (Stalin, Mao, to name a couple of bad ones.. I'm not saying there are only bad ones), but whatever you take as their overall outlook on life (which is impacted heavily by what they think about God, or the lack of existance of God) will to a great degree influence their actions (obviously).
It's just that, with an atheist, your statement is more correct.. you can't tell nearly as much about their overall view of the world simply by who they claim to worship (namely, nobody). If someone claims to be a christian, you know right away that they probably have pretty conventional views on the wrongess of murder; if they're an atheist, you don't really know much one way or another. (No, I'm not insulting all atheists by that statement. Remember, I already said there's more than one kind of atheist. Stalin's variety is not the only kind.)
Now, regardless of whatever else you said, that is a *REALLY* stupid thing to say.
Your religious views will basically define your behaviour.
Of course, I'm assuming that you actually mean someone's overall religious views, rather than simply which god they claim to worship; there's a big difference between Presbyterians, Anglicans, and Roman Catholics today, for example.. and almost just as big a difference between each of those now, and what each of those was like 400 years ago. I'm also talking about the views they *actually* have, as opposed to what they publically claim, if there's a difference.
In other words, what I am saying is, not only *can* you say something about someone based on their religious philosiphy (which is heavily based on which "invisible ghost in the sky" they worship), but you can say a *WHOLE FRIGGING LOT* about them.
For example, if I told you I believed in a god who required that I sacrifice (kill) my firstborn son, then you could pretty obviously say that my views conflicted (violently) with your own. Well, I hope, anyway
The difficult part isn't in making statements (or deductions, if you like) about someone based on what (or even simply in whom) they believe; it's in *figuring out* what (or in whome) they believe.
P.S. Of course, being as I'm a protestant.. somewhere in between Presbyterian and Evengelical.. I don't hapen to agree that most Roman Catholics (or Anglicans, or Jehovah's Witnesses, or Orthodox, etc) are actually worshipping the same God I am.
I say they're worshipping a made up god. In other words, as I said, it's not just which "invisible sky ghost" you *claim* to worship, it's which one you do.. because whoever you do worship (God, or any made up god, or nobody, to put it in my words) has a great impact on your whole outlook on life.. which of course has a great impact on your actions.
I think the same thing can be said about being an atheist, though to a lesser degree; there are various flavours of atheists (Stalin, Mao, to name a couple of bad ones.. I'm not saying there are only bad ones), but whatever you take as their overall outlook on life (which is impacted heavily by what they think about God, or the lack of existance of God) will to a great degree influence their actions (obviously).
It's just that, with an atheist, your statement is more correct.. you can't tell nearly as much about their overall view of the world simply by who they claim to worship (namely, nobody). If someone claims to be a christian, you know right away that they probably have pretty conventional views on the wrongess of murder; if they're an atheist, you don't really know much one way or another. (No, I'm not insulting all atheists by that statement. Remember, I already said there's more than one kind of atheist. Stalin's variety is not the only kind.)
