Richard Dawkins' Letter To His 10 Year-old Daughter(very interesting)

I do NOW.

 

Like I said, you can say one thing but the motives can be different. I'm sure you are aware of this too, topnotch... Hitler did not listen to the christian church at all, in fact it was more the other way around, he and his nazis did what he wanted and if some church had a problem with that they rather keep quiet in a lot of cases because they feared consequences. He obviously merely used the church and if he couldn't he suppressed it.

So, cool quote of this Weinberg guy but I'm afraid he's just simplifying it as usual: it can take religion for a good person to do evil, I agree. But to put it like that it seems it is only religion that could do such a thing. Reeks of plain old vilification to me unfortunately.

 

Actually, he got a lot of support from the catholic church, or at least certain members of The Vatican.

 

Very interesting, thanks for posting it

 

Are you saying that and the arguments he wrote down in Mein kampf have convinced you that he cared about christianity and massacred those jews primarily because of religious motives?

 

Refer back to a Hitler quote I already posted:
“Any violence which does not spring from a spiritual base, will be
wavering and uncertain. It lacks the stability which can only rest in
a fanatical outlook.”

In my opinion, that quote basically confirms that the violence and death he brought to this world were largely based on his religious beliefs and that he was doing what he thought his god wanted him to do. Either that, or he was admitting that he was insane and fanatical. lol

 

lol THANK YOU! I simply thought it was an interesting read and wasn't looking for a debate.

 

Yes. I picked up on something within the letter: http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/showpost.php?p=7611483&postcount=13 -

 

Regardless of how we interpret that part of the letter, we have to keep in mind that Richard Dawkins isn't the average atheist. He's an anti-theist/militant atheist who HATES what religion has done to the world. He is simply pointing to the fact that religion divides us more often than it unites us.

 

Didn't that discussion flow out of the direct content of the OP? I know it may seem old to discuss Hitlers motives again but it is not just about Hitler, he's used as an example for what the OP implies. Of course it may seem like we only go further off topic but I will try not to and was planning on getting another example of authority in it. Because although that letter makes a lot of sense indeed it also cut a few corners in my opinion. So it is still about the contents of the letter which, as others in this thread have stated, might have been not be in the first place for his daughter at all but for the general public that reads his book so we might discuss it endlessly here :biggrin:

 

Or it is just a convenient excuse of which he knew people would easily accept...

 

I won't be pedantic again, and suggest that religion seems to unite quite a lot of people: Hinduism, with about one billion followers (950 million estimated in India).

 

I guess we'll never know.

Regardless, on a large scale, religion is poison. That being said, I can see how/why certain people can benefit from religious faith, because such faith has helped some people pull themselves out of some very dark places. My main thing is that I want people to think for themselves, as opposed to blindly believing exactly what they've been taught to believe since they were old enough to understand words. I don't think anyone should be taught to believe something before they are even old enough to understand those beliefs. If a person actually takes the time to think for themselves and do some research, then I don't care what they believe, as long as they aren't hurting anyone or using it to dictate legislation.

 

Same here man, that's why I sometimes (often ) seem like I get a little riled up when people judge a follower of a certain religion or a religion in general right away. Because frankly, a lot of people that do so just parrot their 'source of authority' so to speak Not saying this counts for you but when I see people talk about Hitlers religious motives regarding wiping out jews I'm afraid I just think study some more sources!

 

Well, I was just using Hitler as an example. I know my take on Hitler is, by no means, concrete and it certainly doesn't apply to all christians.

One problem I have with christians is that most of them don't know a whole lot about the bible. I mean, the bible says women are inferior and should submit to men, and that women aren't allowed to speak in church. The bible says it's okay to sell your children into slavery. It says it's okay to kill your children if they disobey you. It says if a virgin is raped, then she has to marry her rapist. It says a woman should be put to death if it is discovered that she has had premarital sex. It also says it's a sin to eat pork and shellfish. It even says women can't braid their hair or wear jewelry. lol The bible even says all non-believers should be put to death, and it specifically includes your own family members.

Of course, many of these things are in the old testament, but in Matthew 5:17-18, Jesus says "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished". Based on my understanding, that means the laws of ALL of the prophets are to be upheld, whether it be the old testament or the new testament. I mean, the bible is the very foundation of the christian faith, and if you follow the bible, then you should follow ALL of the bible. Anything less is hypocritical, imo.

My point being that most christians only know about the "good" parts of the bible. If they would actually take the time to read the bible from cover to cover(OT and NT), then they'd probably be atheists, or at least start to question some things.

 

Well most christians that don't know shit about the bible are actually not religious believers. They are christians more out of CULTURAL tradition than a religious one. Hence why the inequality where it comes to genders for example can differ largely per country. I have heard more than once for example that the seperation in Saudi restaurants should be regarded as much as a cultural tradition than a 100% religious one. It is a fact that culture shapes religion and vice versa. A lot of christians in western civilisation aren't technically christians at all, this is also a fact. But they are generally drawn into the equation because they still are registered as christian and value their traditional background which happens also to be christian.
That certain people regard everything in the bible as a law does not mean it is so or make the bible stupid or whatever. It's just that idea that is stupid when acted upon. It is not the religion when you look closer at it, but merely a facet of a certain group of followers. It's not only religion that get misinterpretated or deliberitly abused, that also happens in science at times.
That christians should follow ALL of the bible is indeed your opinion. I am inclined to think you would nuancate that too though because you just said you liked people to think for themselves and draw their own conclusions, right? It is clear the bible is not to be followed that easily in one way, so it does not seem hypocritical to me that people just happen to come up with different interpretations at times. It is exactly what you would like: they're thinking for themselves.

 

I agree that it is largely a cultural/traditional thing, which is mentioned in Dawkins' letter. It's cyclical, and those beliefs get handed down from generation to generation.

What I said about christians being hypocrites for not following ALL of the bible is a separate thought from my wanting people to think for themselves, though I guess it is somewhat contradictory. I do want people to think for themselves, but IF a person believes in the christian god and bases their entire life and their morality on that belief, then they should obey every single word of the bible. I guess that's an impossibility though, since the bible contradicts itself at every turn.

Christians interpret the bible the way they have been TAUGHT to interpret it, which is why there are so many denominations of christianity. Some people who belong to certain denominations of christianity believe every other denomination is automatically wrong, just because they don't believe/worship exactly as they do. As I said before, this basically creates religion within religion.

I hate fundamentalists and radicals, but, on some level, at least I can respect the fact that they tend to stay true to their religious texts.

Again, I know I'm being a bit contradictory here, but, while I want people to think for themselves, if a person puts their faith in a god or gods, then they should worship their god/gods with every part of their being. In my opinion, a christian believing anything but a LITERAL interpretation of the bible is half-assed.

 

purely literal minds do not function well - it's rare to encounter one
and certainly uncomfortable . their every thought must have a voice ,
and this gets very noisy . it's unmusical .

 

I suppose that's true. Perhaps it's because I have aspergers. Aspies tend to be very literal and analytical in their thought processes. In fact, studies actually suggest that there is a correlation between aspergers/high-functioning autism and atheism.