Religious fundamentalism could soon be treated as mental illness

page: 3
17
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lone12

I know which egyptian Devil has founded the Quran.
And i know how that same Devil has Deformed in every possible way the Bible.

- you will not hear me war crying.
Im not here to Get my Right.

....but i see the Tsunami coming
at high Speed
crushing yóu, your son, your daughter, and beloved ones

....why should i want to "get my right"...?

i want you to LIVE !


Well after reading through this whole thread I beginning to see why some might think that fundamentalists are struggling a bit. As for mentally ill, well radical people of many persuasions might be considered somewhat off.

Lone12, while you wax poetic in your posts I don't know what you are really trying to say most of the time. Everyone who doesn't believe as you do is doomed and damned?

OK I'll bite. What is the name of the Egyptian devil you're talking about, why is that particular devil deforming the bible?




posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 04:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Lone12
 



No, Tenth.
You are Wrong.
- i m sorry.


Isn't that the problem? Is neither of us can actually say, sincerely, that either of us is wrong or right?


...you make abberations of pathetic people who misunderstand their false religion to be "proof"
"proof" of your stance


Of course I do. When the religious fundamentalists control the conversation and actions of those groups, as they do today, I can very much claim mental illness as a factor.

These are FACTS that I"m giving you. This isn't some belief I hold that isn't supported by contemporary evidence.

Let me ask you a question.

Do you think that those who choose to use religion as a vehicle of hate and violence are mentally sound?


why you have so stubborn to oppose what i think is going to happen :


Because you offer nothing but faith as your reasoning. I offered facts of the topic at hand.

Religious fundamentalists use religion to pursue their psychotic and violent agendas, be they social or economic. That's a fact.

I'm not against religion, trust me. I live in a multi-religious home. I'm the only one who could be considered agnostic or atheist. I have no issues with people who choose to have faith.

I have issues with people who USE faith as a means to push a violent or extreme agenda.

It seems that you would rather allow these people to roam the world, free of any kind of criticism or action against them for their indiscretions.

I don't have it in me to live and let live, when those people choose to use something like religion, to judge, hurt, maim or kill others.

I would expect any true follower of religion to do the exact same.

~Tenth



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 04:27 PM
link   
Oh God...the utopian do-gooders are at it again.


The best solution is to just let people believe whatever they want to believe. It used to be that you could only be jailed or institutionalized for your actions. But more and more, thoughts are now a crime.



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 04:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Guenter
I have always been convinced that any religion is a form of mental illness. And people wonder about the state of civilization and he world? The "nuts" are ruling and the 10% sane ones are called Atheists.


The first step is to label them mentally ill.

The second is to lock them away.

Atheist Utopia accomplished.



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 





Do you think that those who choose to use religion as a vehicle of hate and violence are mentally sound?
So then why use the vehicle as the problem and not the crazy driver. This is no different than banning guns or stereotyping.



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 04:40 PM
link   
The correct approach would be to see extremists as potentially harmful to society. But the reference here is to "religious extremists" specifically, not to extremists in general. That means its agenda driven rather than an honest approach to dealing with extremism.



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 04:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating
The correct approach would be to see extremists as potentially harmful to society. But the reference here is to "religious extremists" specifically, not to extremists in general. That means its agenda driven rather than an honest approach to dealing with extremism.


I agree with 99% of your posts, but this sorta is the forum for that specific topic.



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 04:49 PM
link   
reply to post by deadeyedick
 



o then why use the vehicle as the problem and not the crazy driver. This is no different than banning guns or stereotyping.


Calling a spade a spade?

Are religious fundamentalists more likely to commit acts that are sociopathic or psychotic in nature?

Extreme ideology, be it about religion or guns is going to make you a bit crazy, because the ideology itself is usually rooted in hatred and violence.

I'm at a loss as to why people don't understand that it's not wrong to look at people who share common values and ideology and determine if their overall behavior is considered to be negative.

reply to post by Skyfloating
 



The correct approach would be to see extremists as potentially harmful to society.


So we can't study the reasoning behind the extremism? We can't just say, well he's an extremist and then never investigate the root cause of that behavior or ideology.

There are some things, that are just harmful. Religious extremism is harmful, to all involved other than those who participate in the little sect that the extremists are a part of.

There's no denying that fact.

~Tenth



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 05:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating
Oh God...the utopian do-gooders are at it again.


The best solution is to just let people believe whatever they want to believe. It used to be that you could only be jailed or institutionalized for your actions. But more and more, thoughts are now a crime.


The thoughts, or beliefs, in question led to inaction. That inaction led to the death of a child that didn't have to die. Are you telling us it's okay to let a child die?

The reason they didn't single out extremists in general is because if you are a political extremist, for example, you'll still take your sick child to a hospital. Some religious extremists, obviously, do not.

What they did is a form of delusion. Delusional people are tagged as such because not only are their thoughts and actions way off base from the norms of the society in which they live, but they are dangerous to themselves and others.

Believe what you want to believe, but when that belief causes harm to others, especially children, you need to be locked away. I'm glad the scientific community did this because it tells people they can't hide behind a religion that leads to the death of innocent people.




posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 05:21 PM
link   
That's just FREAKIN' great!
Just as I was about to take up Thor as my new god.

DANG!

(hammer time)



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 05:21 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


Nonsense.

You pontificate as though your

BELIEFS = OBJECTIVE FACTS.

Nonsense.

I know plenty of atheist psychologists who'd agree with you to a point. I know one or two who'd assert that your allegations are off the wall and straight out of your own beliefs and biases.

Even the "simple' concept of "hate" has been defined by you and your cohorts to FIT HAND IN GLOVE WITH YOUR BIASES and personal constructions on reality.

Christians have as much and more objective foundation for defining hate almost opposite, in some cases on some issues.

I realize that the

RELIGIONS

OF ATHEISM

and

SCIENTISM

Are the founding and ruling RELIGIONS ON ATS.

That doesn't make them objectively CORRECT, ACCURATE ETC.

It just means that the tyranny that sometimes still surfaces hereon IN THE NAME OF THOSE RELIGIONS

is but a hint of the tyranny and horror looming at the hand of the oligarchy eager and diligent to remove Christians and particularly Pentecostal, evangelical Christians off the planet totally.

Satan is a real being. He will insist on every last living person he can exercise any control over whatsoever to worship him.

Your "lofty" notions of "sanity" excluding Christians will NOT help you any then.

BTW,

[color=CC9966]a fanatic has been defined as someone who believes something MORE STRONGLY than you do.

Here's the ref on the worship Lucifer goals of the globalist NWO oligarchy:



18. "No one will enter the New World Order unless he or she will make a pledge to worship Lucifer. No one will enter the New Age unless he will take a Luciferian Initiation." David Spangler, Director of Planetary Initiative, United Nations



from


twoday.net...


twga...



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 05:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Taupin Desciple
 





The thoughts, or beliefs, in question led to inaction. That inaction led to the death of a child that didn't have to die. Are you telling us it's okay to let a child die?
the interpretation is what led to the decision. It is just one version of the word. He helps those who give him something to work with.



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 05:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by BO XIAN
reply to post by Guenter
 


The Supreme Court has logically and accurately

labeled

atheism

as a RELIGION . . .


I don't think that's correct. Can you please provide a citation/link for this claim?



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 05:29 PM
link   
And there have been lots of studies done on how religious beliefs among the elderly prolong life compared to those who don't have these beliefs.



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 05:37 PM
link   
reply to post by BO XIAN
 



BELIEFS = OBJECTIVE FACTS.


Belief in god = belief
Religious Extremists using God as a means to kill people = fact.

How is that objective?


I know plenty of atheist psychologists who'd agree with you to a point. I know one or two who'd assert that your allegations are off the wall and straight out of your own beliefs and biases.


What allegations? Religious extremism, like any other extremism, is dangerous in most cases.

That's not an allegation, is a fact supported by pretty much the entire history of man.

Moderates don't go out and kill people for no reason...


Christians have as much and more objective foundation for defining hate almost opposite, in some cases on some issues.


I never stated that ALL religious people are fundamentalists, nor did I say that religion was inherently wrong or dangerous. I simply stated that extremism was.


Are the founding and ruling RELIGIONS ON ATS.


Oh lay off of the generalizations. I'm neither an Atheist, nor a subscriber of the religion of science.

I think for myself and make up my own mind, regardless of other people's opinions.


is but a hint of the tyranny and horror looming at the hand of the oligarchy eager and diligent to remove Christians and particularly Pentecostal, evangelical Christians off the planet tot


I have no desire to see that happen what so ever. I would just like those who, again for the millionth time, use religion as a means to harm people or otherwise cause chaos in the world, to quietly go away and be replaced by their moderate counterparts, who out number them.


Your "lofty" notions of "sanity" excluding Christians will NOT help you any then.


Right, it's a lofty notion, to suggest that people who use religion to kill other people are insane.

Are you serious? You would consider those people sane? You talk as if I describe all religious people as being bad and insane. That's the complete opposite of anything I've ever stated on ATS>

I've always stated that I know plenty of good Christians and Muslims and other kind of religious folk.

They aren't the problem. People who enjoy using religion, again, as a vehicle for power and hate and violence are the problem.

The fact that you don't wish anybody to investigate, or call that out, is very telling.

~Tenth



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 05:54 PM
link   
reply to post by ATSmediaPRO
 



Kathleen Taylor, a neurologist at Oxford University, said that recent developments suggest that we will soon be able to treat religious fundamentalism and other forms of ideological beliefs potentially harmful to society as a form of mental illness.


If you can see the wider picture, basically the article is talking about religious beliefs, political convictions, patriotismus etc. Everything that nurtures and give platform to "Us Vs Them" mentality. Anyone else can see the potential to misuse it ?

Peace



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 06:16 PM
link   
Human society, and any type of social cohesion, cannot exist without ideology. Ideology is just a shared belief system. This whole discussion of religious belief = harming society = mental illness is bunk science and secular ideological witch hunting.

You are saying there is some kind of program for ultimate Utopian normativity regarding human behaviors and beliefs when there is not. Last I checked those who are more secular than religious are no more law abiding or upstanding than the rest.
edit on 9-8-2013 by djr33222 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 06:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by BO XIAN
reply to post by Guenter
 


The Supreme Court has logically and accurately

labeled

atheism

as a RELIGION . . .

It has all the features & aspects of a religion.

So does the RELIGION OF SCIENTISM

soooooooooooooooooo

join the club in the que to the gulag.


What the Supreme court rules or doesn't rule is for me as important as a mouse pissing in the wind. I am not American, nor do I live in this country, so they can rule what they want.



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 06:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Guenter
 



What the Supreme court rules or doesn't rule is for me as important as a mouse pissing in the wind. I am not American, nor do I live in this country, so they can rule what they want.


And how many people do you think would take the United State's Supreme Court's opinion over your opinion, regardless of locale?

Geez, if they are a mouse pissing in the the wind you, by comparison, must be a bacterium attempting cell-division in a tornado.
edit on 9-8-2013 by djr33222 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 06:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by djr33222
reply to post by Guenter
 



What the Supreme court rules or doesn't rule is for me as important as a mouse pissing in the wind. I am not American, nor do I live in this country, so they can rule what they want.

And how many people do you think would take the United State's Supreme Court's opinion over your opinion, regardless of locale?


The same people who wish to continue to convince others that Atheism is a religion and will in that case take any crap, including a SC decision to call atheism a religion. Atheism is just that the opposite to religion. And to decide that Atheism is a "religion" shows you what a laughing stock the US has become. And since I don't care what the remaining 90% of people think and do and define and so, but stick with that is proven and fact, i don't give a damn what the USSC says or rules.





new topics
top topics
 
17
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join