It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Religious Fundamentalism and Intolerance

page: 3
14
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 15 2016 @ 11:33 AM
link   
a reply to: ChaoticOrder

I’ve already made numerous OP’S making your point from the other perspective...that is as a believer.


So it doesn’t always boil down to belief and disbelief.


The fundamentalist in ALL religions are dangerous and potentially dangerous when they hold beliefs that God favors them over others.


They have not developed out of a certain level of development. Their stuck at the ethnocentric level.


You say you believe in science then check out Spiral Dynamics. That will enhance your understanding of this

en.wikipedia.org...




posted on May, 15 2016 @ 11:36 AM
link   
a reply to: ChaoticOrder



Yes I understand exactly why Trump is popular and you're absolutely right, a large part of it is his "nationalist" policies. And you're also right that a certain level of nationalism can be good and healthy, but it can also be extremely unhealthy if taken too far. Banning all Muslims from entering the country or building a huge wall across the southern border could be interpreted as nationalism, but I would strongly argue they are both terrible ideas. The problem with Trump is that he lacks modesty and humility, his entire campaign is fueled by incendiary and divisive talking points.

His campaign literally feeds on hate and fear



Here I thought you wanted to have an honest discussion.

You know damn well that in bold is pure nonsense yet you felt the need to embellish the premise of your own OP....


Have a good one!



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 11:47 AM
link   
a reply to: KaibaTheJedi


I see a different problem that has been occurring on these forums over time. Many atheists are attacking and generally being intolerant of those who have a form of religious belief. I find that disgusting.

If they can't take the backlash, they shouldn't have been dishing it out for the past 2000 years. I find the narrow-minded, bigoted, elitism disgusting.


Those same Atheists then have the audicaity to say that they are the ones being attacked, when in fact there the attackers.

Maybe you need to read more past threads/posts, and you'll see those atheists speak from their experiences.


And before you say anything else, I have seen many agnostics/atheists here who posted logicless and bs posts. Point is atheists need to be more tolerant and are not immune to believing bs.

Such is the human condition. We are prone to fallacy when we lack the desire or ability to engage in critical thought.


Important to note us that before anyone says that most of the users here are of a certain viewpoint/belief-system, most of the users here didn't even state their belief system so no definite conclusion can be drawn there unless the 300k users on here each answer this.

A poll was taken here years ago that showed the overwhelming majority of those polled to be non-religious. Granted, that has probably changed to some degree in one direction or another, but the statement is not without precedent.

edit on 5/15/2016 by Klassified because: spell-ing



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 11:55 AM
link   
a reply to: seeker1963

I watched an interview with Trump a few months back and I'm pretty sure that's what he said. However he did add it would be for a "limited time" until he can "figure out what's happening with America" or some vague crap like that. But if my statement was incorrect then please feel free to correct me, don't just say I'm wrong without telling me how.



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 12:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: ChaoticOrder
a reply to: seeker1963

I watched an interview with Trump a few months back and I'm pretty sure that's what he said. However he did add it would be for a "limited time" until he can "figure out what's happening with America" or some vague crap like that. But if my statement was incorrect then please feel free to correct me, don't just say I'm wrong without telling me how.


If you have a violent extremist group whose stated goal is to infiltrate your country and cause murder and mayhem, and then there is a sudden influx of people from that part of the world and there is no way to tell who is an infiltrator and who is not, what do you do?



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 12:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Klassified

I see someone is triggered...
"dishing out"? The main attacks I have been seeing is a group of atheists going on and on and attacking those who have a different belief system then them. I find these Intolerant atheists the main living embodiement of bigotry/elitism. These people just see someone even mentions anything about religion/belief-system in any way, and those same atheists choose to attack that person for that. Is that not the definition of elitism? Not to mention many of their "arguments" are strawmans and their main purpose serves to cause divide and pointless argument.

From experience and research, more attacks have come from mainly atheists themselves. Heck I've had atheists threaten my life before because I had different views from him. Maybe you should take your rosé tinted glasses off if you think atheists are always the victims and never the attackers. Research proves otherwise. Lots and lots of bile has been spewed from atheists.
Though I won't classify entire groups based on individuals as every single group and belief systems has their share of douchebags.

As for your poll, did it poll most of the users or not? Unless you poll the majority of users, you cannot say for certain that most of the users fall under a certain group as it would be a fallacy then.
In closure, if atheists want respect, then they themselves have to show tolerance and respect. Golden rule of treat others the way you want to be treated.
edit on 15-5-2016 by KaibaTheJedi because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 12:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: RainbowPhoenix
a reply to: ketsuko

Oh I'm totally cool with diversity just a point of observation is all. I also don't care what a person believes in so long as whatever that belief is does not affect me and they do not attempt to force their views on me. Oh you believe in God or religious doctrine...thats cool but do not expect me to adhere to the "rules" that you adhere to because guess what I don't believe in them so they hold no power over me.



As with me.

Forcing religious belief through politics.

Making laws that force me to adhere to a religious belief - - is never OK.

America is a secular Democratic Republic - - Separation of Church and State - - always.



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 01:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: uncommitted

I don't really think it's always religious beliefs whatsoever. I think it's people using that as a convenient flag to fly while oozing out their bigotry because they seem to think it gives them a right to think that way. I personally think to some extent it's small town syndrome where people see something that differs to their notion of 'normality' which makes them scared and angry. I know this is going to sound really boring to you, but the New Testament is the founding book of Christianity - the clue is in the name, but it is of course also reliant on the OT for its narrative which alleges to tell the story ultimately of one group of people over generations, and the culture and laws they lived within. Some people seem to believe that non members of very specific Jewish sects should be following those same laws well over 2,000 years later and don't say that is only from Christian people if there is any truth to separation of church and state.

I'm sorry, but unwarranted hatred exists within and without religion, it just does, for some though it's a convenient a) excuse for their behaviour based on their twist on it, or b) excuse to say anyone who follows a faith is in some way either intellectually or morally inferior. Pol Pot - political. Rwanda - political. Nazism (although I know many on here would rather than choke on their own vomit than agree) - political. Nanking - political. Stalins purges in the 30's - political.

I could go on. Some twisted loser of a KKK person talking about white Christians in no way makes his argument logical, kind of surprises me that he has it in his mind that Christ would be white- but that's the point, humans are stupid, some of them are not only stupid but aggressive and psychotic. Is religion the fault for that? Only one way to answer that one isn't there - show me evidence of zero per cent of any people who don't follow a faith of not being a mixture of stupid, aggressive and psychotic.


EXCELLENT POINTS. There's a tons and tons of ignorance posted day in and day out hereon about religiosity and it's correlations and implications.

I hope later this evening to post some research about bigotry and religiosity. The facts are quite the opposite of what a majority hereon seem to believe.

Just a teaser now:

RELIGIOSITY is not a monolithic thing by any means.

1. EXTRINSIC RELIGIOSITY is the opposite of
2. INTRINSIC RELIGIOSITY.

Extrinsic religiosity is like putting religion on like a coat for business purposes or to look good in the community etc. Those people consistently behave VERY differently from

The Intrinsic's who own their beliefs at a deep emotional and heart level and live them out honorably, walk the talk.

Then there's the indiscrimminantly ANTI-RELIGIOUS etc. etc. And that's where the surprises are likely to be for many hereon.


Later.



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 03:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: KaibaTheJedi
a reply to: Klassified

I see someone is triggered...
"dishing out"? The main attacks I have been seeing is a group of atheists going on and on and attacking those who have a different belief system then them. I find these Intolerant atheists the main living embodiement of bigotry/elitism. These people just see someone even mentions anything about religion/belief-system in any way, and those same atheists choose to attack that person for that. Is that not the definition of elitism? Not to mention many of their "arguments" are strawmans and their main purpose serves to cause divide and pointless argument.

From experience and research, more attacks have come from mainly atheists themselves. Heck I've had atheists threaten my life before because I had different views from him. Maybe you should take your rosé tinted glasses off if you think atheists are always the victims and never the attackers. Research proves otherwise. Lots and lots of bile has been spewed from atheists.
Though I won't classify entire groups based on individuals as every single group and belief systems has their share of douchebags.

As for your poll, did it poll most of the users or not? Unless you poll the majority of users, you cannot say for certain that most of the users fall under a certain group as it would be a fallacy then.
In closure, if atheists want respect, then they themselves have to show tolerance and respect. Golden rule of treat others the way you want to be treated.

I see someones trigger got tripped.

Did you copy and paste that, or come up with it yourself? Replace the word atheist with the word Christian in your post, and you'll have it? Do unto others? I've met few Christians who live it in word, let alone deed.

Welcome to ATS, by the way.



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 05:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Klassified

Not a specific reply to Klassified but just to add to this thread for the discussion:

From:

www.hirr.hartsem.edu...

[This looks and reads like an abstract but is not labeled an abstract. Bold, color emphases are my added]



Dominating conceptual paradigm in the empirical psychology of religion during the last three decades.

Based on Gordon Allport's theoretical distinction between mature and immature religion (see Allport and Ross 1967), the construction of an intrinsic-extrinsic scale to measure different religious orientations appeared to clarify the troubling finding that general measures of religion had positively correlated with prejudice. Consistent with Allport's conceptualization of mature religion, it was found that only extrinsic religion, or religion as a means, correlated with prejudice. Intrinsic religion, or religion as an end [a goal, a heart-felt way of life], characterized the unprejudiced and was compatible with Allport's views of mature religion. The scale to measure religious orientation, initially conceived as a continuum from extrinsic to intrinsic, quickly generated interest among empirical researchers. Numerous studies have been published that relate intrinsic and extrinsic religion to a variety of individual difference variables such as coping styles, narcissism, guilt, fear of death, a wide variety of religious experiences, various cognitive processes, and varieties of prejudice.
.
Consistent with Allport's view of mature religiosity, extrinsic but not intrinsic religiosity typically correlates with more dysfunctional psychological constructs. Many psychometric critiques and modifications of the scales have been published. The only consensus is that extrinsic and intrinsic must be treated as independent scales, not as a continuum as initially conceived. Major critical reviews have emphasized the lack of theory-driven research, the inadequacies of these scales to operationalize fully Allport's theory, and the failure to clearly define religious orientations in value-neutral terms. The psychometric limitations of the original scales repeatedly have been challenged. An age-universal version of these scales is available. It is a matter of contention whether the scales are best used as independent dimensions or the basis for constructing typologies. Studies using these scales and theoretically linked alternatives continue to provide the major database for the contemporary empirical psychology of religion.
.
—Ralph W. Hood, Jr .


The bottom line is . . . EXTRINSIC religiosity correlates with much greater prejudice & bigotry.

INTRINSIC religiosity correlates with the opposite of prejudice and bigotry.

To deride generic religiosity as bigoted is inaccurate--VERY inaccurate.



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 05:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Klassified I see your trying to troll and posting nothing but bait. This whole thread in fact has much bait that is not worth biting.



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 07:34 PM
link   
I don't think using examples from other sites is a good use of scientific method.

Religions are a form of social control, it's similar to leftist political ideology; in both instances, many feel they are right and no amount of evidence would persuade them otherwise.

The rise in right wing, and left wing propaganda is due to the election season. There are a lot of people being paid to spout total garbage.

There is a reason why it is not acceptable to discuss religion or politics, except on anonymous internet forums.

This is a two-fold problem. The right feels threatened, reactionary groups will pop up. I believe the social engineers are aware of this phenomenon, and propaganda plays a huge part. I believe the intention is to push reactionary groups into violence, it is a useful tool. It should also be noted, the reactionary right is not the only groups being targeted; the revolutionary groups are also targets being pushed to violence. Look at the massive propaganda campaign over police brutality against minorities; while it happens, it is not as widespread as it is being portrayed.

Fringe groups have to be mitigated, not inflamed; but that is assuming we are looking to create a better society. The goal is total control, civil unrest is a useful tool serving as an excuse for martial law.

ATS is not much different from other web forums. The left and right will congregate to forums that have majority on their side, they do not like to be challenged on any intellectual basis. If you look at forums from a neutral standpoint, go to a left leaning forum, go to a right leaning forum; both have a tendency of minimizing the genuine concerns of the other side, while amplifying the ridiculousness of the small fringe elements.

en.wikipedia.org...

It's easy to manipulate the right using religious ideology, and it is easy to manipulate the left using political ideology.



Virtually every problem facing America, will never be proposed by either side.
edit on 15-5-2016 by GodEmperor because: added video link



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 01:36 PM
link   
a reply to: ChaoticOrder

I believe if Trump can't even say he has asked for forgiveness to God; he must be a Satanist. Protestants began with Martin Luther who believed there is no hell. I'm not judging Trump, but God will.

Trump does not even understand what the Holy Communion is:





posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 01:49 PM
link   


But some how this girl goes on making racist videos without being arrested


Mommy! The boogyman hurt muh feelings!



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join