rekinomtla:


Moral relativism says nothing about reason. It's says morals are relative.

They are relative because of reason not arbitrarily.

rekinomtla:


Not sure what you mean here.

The fallacy called faulty generalization.

No, I don't believe in moral relativism. Atheists believe morality is relative.

Where in athiest book is that written?

What athiest will tell you is morality is subjective in reality.

Even in Religions morality is relative or subjective, what's moral in this religion might be immoral in another religion.

If his society approves of it then yes it morally fine according to moral relativism.

Then that society is unreasonable and attacking fallacy.

Go ahead, show me as atheist how you reach that conclusion.

Ok, if an atheist showed up and assist you in your financial need, and you said you hate him, is that moral?

tintingz:

Even in Religions morality is relative or subjective, what's moral in this religion might be immoral in another religion.

Even within a religion the morality turns out to be subjective. Take David for instance, committed murder and adultery, punishment of which is death yet he was not stoned to death.

Seun:

It is true for the majority of atheists. After escaping from religion, people tend to rely more on logic and reasoning.


It is immoral to me. Whenever people say that something is immoral, that’s precisely what they mean.

As an individual, I can explain why I believe an act is immoral and get other people to agree with me so that collectively we can find a way to discourage other people from engaging in the act. The only difference between us is that you feel the need to use scriptures to support your moral views and I do not. As far as I’m concerned, if an act causes more harm than good, takes away or limits people’s freedom and happiness, is unfair, needlessly cruel, very stupid, etc, then it’s probably morally wrong. Something that is wrong in most scenarios, such as adultery, may be acceptable in some scenarios, e.g in an open marriage. Morality at its best involves the active use of our big brains as social mammals.

This is y I said Atheist are dangerous people, just listen to the bolded.

For three weeks now, u banned me from FP even though my article have a source.

That action of yours cause me more harm than good, limiting my freedom and happiness.

It was unfair and needlessly cruel.

I will not call you stupid, so i leave out your last comment.

That is y, reason and logic is not dependable as far as humans are concerned.

If so, why do we have wars? Believe it or not, the people that declare war have good reason and logic to do so, on both sides(attack/defence)

LordReed:


Even within a religion the morality turns out to be subjective. Take David for instance, committed murder and adultery, punishment of which is death yet he was not stoned to death.

Exactly..

hammer6F:

That is y, reason and logic is not dependable as far as humans are concerned.

Actually, it has produced more utility than religion. It is with the products of logic and reason we are using to communicate right now not that of religion.

If so, why do we have wars? Believe it or not, the people that declare war have good reason and logic to do so, on both sides(attack/defence)

There is no claim that logic and reason will completely stave off the baser instincts of man while religion makes such a claim. Yet the religious have instigated some of the most brutal wars of our pre-modern past. And even in the modern era religion has provided an excuse for war and brutality.

LordReed:


Actually, it has produced more utility than religion. It is with the products of logic and reason we are using to communicate right now not that of religion.



There is no claim that logic and reason will completely stave off the baser instincts of man while religion makes such a claim. Yet the religious have instigated some of the most brutal wars of our pre-modern past. And even in the modern era religion has provided an excuse for war and brutality.

CIA

LordReed:


Actually, it has produced more utility than religion. It is with the products of logic and reason we are using to communicate right now not that of religion.



There is no claim that logic and reason will completely stave off the baser instincts of man while religion makes such a claim. Yet the religious have instigated some of the most brutal wars of our pre-modern past. And even in the modern era religion has provided an excuse for war and brutality.

So from your perspective, religion causes Wars?

Prior to Christianity or Islam or Judaism, the humans had no war?

Let me ask you before u head to the middle east for example.

The war between Israel and Palestine is it a war over land or religion?

In fact religion is the reason one side have not completely wiped the weaker side off the face of the earth.

hammer6F:


So from your perspective, religion causes Wars?

No from his perspective, religion claim it will end war but has not done it.

Prior to Christianity or Islam or Judaism, the humans had no war?

there was... a lot of things causes war, blaming it on logic is quite funny

Let me ask you before u head to the middle east for example.

The war between Israel and Palestine is it a war over land or religion?

religion

frank317:

No from his perspective, religion claim it will end war but has not done it.


there was... a lot of things causes war, blaming it on logic is quite funny


religion

Religion will end war once we lock all the Atheist people like Seun in prison.

And everybody adhere to the way of life preached in these religion, with nobody taking the law(matters) into their hands.

hammer6F:


This is y I said Atheist are dangerous people, just listen to the bolded.

For three weeks now, u banned me from FP even though my article have a source.

That action of yours cause me more harm than good, limiting my freedom and happiness.

It was unfair and needlessly cruel.

I will not call you stupid, so i leave out your last comment.

That is y, reason and logic is not dependable as far as humans are concerned.

If so, why do we have wars? Believe it or not, the people that declare war have good reason and logic to do so, on both sides(attack/defence)

lol now I understand where op is coming from, so na ban dey make you dey provoke for all atheist?

Blakjewelry:

lol now I understand where op is coming from, so na ban dey make you dey provoke for all atheist?

lollz


My brother, it is a trigger for a point of view held against Atheist.

Regardless of the FP ban placed on me by Seun for no reason, I held all Atheist in that regard.

No be today.

hammer6F:


So from your perspective, religion causes Wars?

Prior to Christianity or Islam or Judaism, the humans had no war?

Let me ask you before u head to the middle east for example.

The war between Israel and Palestine is it a war over land or religion?

In fact religion is the reason one side have not completely wiped the weaker side off the face of the earth.

religion is nearly as old as man while logic and reason was given it proper place by Greeks hence they where one of the first people to practice Democratic rule and all that.

though greed is one of original cause of war, religion as been a great tool. Judaism, Islam and Christianity are not the first religion to exist, there ancient religious belief system that predate Judaism.

the people of the middle is of the same genetic stock meaning they have the same origin what divided them is their religious belief.

Blakjewelry:

religion is nearly as old as man while logic and reason was given it proper place by Greeks hence they where one of the first people to practice Democratic rule and all that.

though greed is one of original cause of war, religion as been a great tool. Judaism, Islam and Christianity are not the first religion to exist, there ancient religious belief system that predate Judaism.

the people of the middle is of the same genetic stock meaning they have the same origin what divided them is their religious belief.

Religion not Interest?

Are u sure?

Becos, i can tell you that personal and common interest predates Religion.

hammer6F:


lollz


My brother, it is a trigger for a point of view held against Atheist.

Regardless of the FP ban placed on me by Seun for no reason, I held all Atheist in that regard.

No be today.

the truth is I was once in your shoes though I won't say I felt hatred for those who don't believe in the Christian God

fast forward to many years later in my search for knowledge, I begin to question all and that is something not allowed as a religious person. reading through history I discovered Egypt and mesopotamia has similar but different account of the creation story one they are both older, and while those try to explain how the gods came into existence, the newer version which is Judaism skip that part.

now even the book of Genesis seems to be a lift off from other books such as the book of Adam and eve and the book of Enoch. now before you will be quick to write off those book, do you know some of new testament writers made some quote off those book?

take for instance. story of the fallen angels and maybe you might have heard some pastors mentioned how the angels were made from flame. these are found in those book, now the question I like you to answer is why are they not included in the bible and Koran.

hammer6F:


Religion not Interest?

Are u sure?

Becos, i can tell you that personal and common interest predates Religion.

sure personal interest first that is why I said greed is the original cause of war. then religion became a tool because it can easily be molded by the preacher.

reason is still young in the game, a good reason one should not something illegally from someone is because you will feel bad if someone did the same to you and not because god or anybody will be angry with you.

take for instance anytime I read a murder case on nairaland, I feel for the people left behind by the deceased I wonder the pain and trauma they are passing through.

hammer6F:


So from your perspective, religion causes Wars?

Prior to Christianity or Islam or Judaism, the humans had no war?

Let me ask you before u head to the middle east for example.

The war between Israel and Palestine is it a war over land or religion?

In fact religion is the reason one side have not completely wiped the weaker side off the face of the earth.

Men and their greed cause war. Religion we are told will cause men to no longer follow their baser instincts so the question is where is this moderation? In the bible we are told of Israel's wars to conquer Canaan driven by their belief that God told them to exterminate all who would not bow the knee to God. Leaving the middle east for a moment, Constantine the Emperor who adopted Christianity as the Roman empire state religion, said he received a vision while on the battlefield from Christ, telling him to conquer in his name. The Holy Roman Empire established some time after Constantine was involved in at least 22 wars. There is no record of religion moderating the thirst for war on the other hand we have distinct examples of people fighting wars in the name of religion.

LordReed:
Men and their greed cause war.
Religion we are told will cause men to no longer follow their baser instincts so the question is where is this moderation?
In the bible we are told of Israel's wars to conquer Canaan driven by their belief that God told them to exterminate all who would not bow the knee to God.
Leaving the middle east for a moment...

Not so fast Jose.
You seem to forget that Abraham, over 430 years ago before the Israrelite set foot on Canaan, had the land title deed for the place

LordReed:
Constantine the Emperor who adopted Christianity as the Roman empire state religion, said he received a vision while on the battlefield from Christ, telling him to conquer in his name.
The Holy Roman Empire established some time after Constantine was involved in at least 22 wars.
There is no record of religion moderating the thirst for war on the other hand we have distinct examples of people fighting wars in the name of religion.

Actually, the word "religion" has changed its meaning from originally being benevolence, thoughtful consideration and generosity for other people in need

It is compassion that moderates.
It makes you or lets you become less extreme, intense or violent to want to fight wars with another

Yup, compassion cuts right through Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, New Age etcetera
Also I doubt you've ever asked about someone's belief or unbelief first before giving your compassion?

If anyone wants to do religion, then compassion, is the religion, on record, deemed pure and faultless by God

Whatever the front, however it is painted
the truth and fact is, what is fronted as pure and faultless religion in today's world, isnt it

Religion, that is pure and faultless, is about, not, how regular one prays, is not about regular congregated attendance.
Religion, that is pure and faultless, is not, about wearing hijab or burka

Before what the world has become today, a priest & levite (i.e. "church" worker) had been known to slip up on what pure and faultless religion is

Anything less than practising, pure and faultless religion, is not true and so thereby is false religion

A lot of misguided spurious and/or unsubstantiated claims have been committed under the guise of a religion that's true, pure and faultless

hammer6F:


Religion will end war once we lock all the Atheist people like Seun in prison.

I actually thought u were serious... Smh

war will end if ur God simply appears to the whole world for one day and tell us the right way to worship him instead of sitting in heaven like Humpty Dumpty watching boko haram slaughter people in his name or watch jehover witness accuse other Christians of worshiping him wrongly or watch Christians drawing cartoons of pedophilic Mohammed which in turn results to killings in the north.

Has seun ever even insulted u or call u names? Why do u think he is the cause of any war? Are u OK?

And everybody adhere to the way of life preached in these religion, with nobody taking the law(matters) into their hands.

Which way of life did religion preach? Segregation? Remember "do not be equally yolked with the world?" Is it the religion that asked u to hate atheists that will stop war? When people hate other people... War starts. U are already at war with atheists who have done nothing wrong to u

MuttleyLaff:
Not so fast Jose.
You seem to forget that Abraham, over 430 years ago before the Israrelite set foot on Canaan, had the land title deed for the place

LoL, given to him by who?

Actually, the word "religion" has changed its meaning from originally being benevolence, thoughtful consideration and generosity for other people in need

It is compassion that moderates.
It makes you or lets you become less extreme, intense or violent to want to fight wars with another

Yup, compassion cuts right through Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, New Age etcetera
Also I doubt you've ever asked about someone's belief or unbelief first before giving your compassion?

If anyone wants to do religion, then compassion, is the religion, on record, deemed pure and faultless by God

Whatever the front, however it is painted
the truth and fact is, what is fronted as pure and faultless religion in today's world, isnt it

Religion, that is pure and faultless, is about, not, how regular one prays, is not about regular congregated attendance.
Religion, that is pure and faultless, is not, about wearing hijab or burka

Before what the world has become today, a priest & levite (i.e. "church" worker) had been known to slip up on what pure and faultless religion is

Anything less than practising, pure and faultless religion, is not true and so thereby is false religion

I don't know what you arguing for because you have not shown where this moderation has made nations not go to war.

LordReed:
LoL, given to him by who?

I recommend you read parts of Genesis to get yourself up to speed,
especially for starters, the parts where God repeatedly promised Abraham Canaan.

This is called getting education in a compelling way

LordReed:
I don't know what you arguing for because you have not shown where this moderation has made nations not go to war.

I dont do arguing, meaning I dont share nor exchange ignorance(s)

Just as the poor will always be with us, so nation up till tomorrow will always go to war
Compassion, however, if existing, can and will moderate nations going to war
Moderate, in this context, as you know, means reduction

MuttleyLaff:
I recommend you read parts of Genesis to get yourself up to speed,
especially for starters, the parts where God repeatedly promised Abraham Canaan.

This is called getting education in a compelling way

LoL, I wonder if even the ancients in their less advanced legal systems would have entertained such a spurious claim. Why did they now have to kill the Canaanites? God should have used his power, the same way he gave Abraham the land.

I dont do arguing, meaning I dont share nor exchange ignorance(s)

Just as the poor will always be with us, so nation up till tomorrow will always go to war
Compassion, however, if existing, can and will moderate nations going to war
Moderate, in this context, as you know, means reduction

Well you certainly haven't shown any knowledge of what you are talking about. Very simple point, show where religion has moderated man's nature and reduced (not even eliminated, lemme be fair) war.

Seun:

There are some things in life that we just have to accept whether we like them or not. For example, that bad things often happen to good people. That death is inevitable. And that objective morality, as attractive as it may sound to those who want everything to be black and white so they don’t have to think, does not exist.

That’s exactly my issue with atheists, they refused to accept the moral implications of atheism because they don’t like them. Rather than saying their moral beliefs are just preferences, they’ll instead stress that their beliefs are right, correct, reasonable and morally superior to others, while simultaneously pretending that relativism has any room for moral progress.

Religious morality is not objective. Christians and Muslims differ on whether is wrong to murder people for drawing cartoons, even though they worship the same God of Abraham. Jehovah’s Witnesses and Catholics disagree on whether blood transfusions and contraceptives are good or evil. Deeper Life and Christ Embassy disagree on whether it’s a sin for women to wear trousers. Joyce Meyer believes God called her to be a pastor but other Christians believe that God doesn’t want any woman to be a Pastor.

Mere disagreements doesn’t indicate that morality is subjective for the very same reason different beliefs about the age or shape of the earth doesn’t mean that science is subjective.

Religious people may believe that God’s morality is objective, but since they have no objective means of figuring out what God considers to be moral or immoral in every situation - because their religious texts can be interpreted in numerous conflicting ways - the morality of religious people is also very subjective.

Objective morality is a fantasy.

Religious texts may be interpreted in numerous ways but that doesn’t discard the fact that one of those many interpretations actually correctly interprets the message the original author intended to convey. Different interpretations just like moral or scientific disagreements doesn’t show that morality or science is subjective. All it shows is that there are disagreements.

And I find it ironic that you say objective morality is a fantasy as you seem to be arguing for it from what you said here:

Seun:

As far as I’m concerned, if an act causes more harm than good, takes away or limits people’s freedom and happiness, is unfair, needlessly cruel, very stupid, etc, then it’s probably morally wrong.

This seems to imply that any action that causes "more harm than good, takes away or limits people’s freedom and happiness, is unfair, or needlessly cruel" is always wrong or immoral. If this is moral relativism it is a very strange form of it.

Limiting people’s freedom and happiness unnecessarily is wrong because most people wouldn’t want that to be done to them.

Why is it “wrong” to do things to people that you wouldn’t want to be done to you?

If we didn’t know whether we would be born to slaves or slave owners, we would all prefer to live in societies without slavery.

History has shown this to be false, numerous societies preferred to have slavery.

Causing more harm than good, if practiced widely, leads to a shittier society.

Of course if it’s done in an unintelligent way it will lead to a shittier society. But a society can still be successful even when abhorrent morals are widely practiced.

Adultery in most cases is wrong because adulterers break the promise of fidelity that they made to their spouses. If both spouses agree to see other people, then no promise is broken when it happens.

Why is breaking the promise of fidelity wrong?

Prostitution is wrong when the prostitutes or their customers are married or attached and their partners haven’t agreed to let them engage in the act. If prostitutes and their customers are single or in open relationships, and they use condoms to slow the spread of sexual diseases, what’s the problem?

So protective sex for money between two consensual adults is morally acceptable because it harms no one, nor does it limit anyone’s freedom? What about pedophilia? Does it too have morally acceptable situations like this? For example (hypothetically) would you consider the Islamic prophet Muhammad marriage to Aisha to have been morally acceptable if the marriage was a happy one as muslims claim?

Reasoning about morality is quite easy once you drop the authoritarian model of morality where things are classified as right or wrong because “God said so”.

I disagree, I think the discussion of morality becomes much more interesting and thought provoking once we avoid simplistically defining the moral objectivist position as the “God said so” view, a position held by both theists and some atheists alike. I think we should instead examine the philosophical literature on metaethics and deeply consider the reasons provided by philosopher’s for and against their positions.

Freethinkers come to the same conclusions on moral issues far more often than you would expect. Without the divisive influence of religion (and politics), it’s actually much easier to come to agreement on moral issues. We are all human beings, after all. It’s amazing.

If we define atheists as freethinkers then it makes perfect sense why they tend to reach the same conclusions. It’s the same reason why many atheists tend to believe or are sympathetic to various fringe theories like mythicism, logical empiricism or the historical flawed conflict thesis. It just the way it is, atheists share common beliefs about various issues because they atheists not because they freethinkers. If freethinking was somehow ingrained in atheism then those freethinkers supposedly dependent on logic and reason wouldn’t cling to such naïve beliefs about science and history.

LordReed:
LoL, I wonder if even the ancients in their less advanced legal systems would have entertained such a spurious claim. Why did they now have to kill the Canaanites? God should have used his power, the same way he gave Abraham the land

".... even the ancients in their less advanced legal systems..." you said.
What sheer ignorance.
Abraham was given land title deed for purchase of wells etcetera. Go check that information out

So you really expected it to be a stroll in park, just turn up and announce to the Canaanites saying
"Hello, we're home honey ...." and the Canaanites will just roll on their back, handing over the land to the Israelites on a platter of gold.

People usually have to fight for what rightfully is theirs.
The Canaanites will kill them first, if given half a chance, so whatever is needful needed to be done.

LordReed:
Well you certainly haven't shown any knowledge of what you are talking about.

Very simple point, show where religion has moderated man's nature and reduced (not even eliminated, lemme be fair) war.

Please don't find excuses for you finding it intellectually demanding to see the knowledge of what I am talking about.

True, pure and faultless religion that God approves of, centres and revolves around compassion.

No need for being fair, moderation, as I earlier said before, means reduction.

Now, if there is more of compassion among and/or between humans, wars considerably will be reduced.
An increase in compassion will bring a reduction of fighting wars
This isn't difficult to understand

MuttleyLaff:
".... even the ancients in their less advanced legal systems..." you said.
What sheer ignorance.
Abraham was given land title deed for purchase of wells etcetera. Go check that information out

So you really expected it to be a stroll in park, just turn up and announce to the Canaanites saying
"Hello, we're home honey ...." and the Canaanites will just roll on their back, handing over the land to the Israelites on a platter of gold.

People usually have to fight for what rightfully is theirs.
The Canaanites will kill them first, if given half a chance, so whatever is needful needed to be done.

LoL, were the title deeds for all of the land extending from Sinai(?) to Syria? And yes I expected it to be a walk in the park. It was God who promised, why are men killing other men for it? Like if you can't see how bleeped up that is, you truly are blind.

Please don't find excuses for you finding it intellectually demanding to see the knowledge of what I am talking about.

True, pure and faultless religion that God approves of, centres and revolves around compassion.

No need for being fair, moderation, as I earlier said before, means reduction.

Now, if there is more of compassion among and/or between humans, wars considerably will be reduced.
An increase in compassion will bring a reduction of fighting wars
This isn't difficult to understand

LoL, this is just typical. When ever asked for actual evidence for the claims people like you make, they chicken out and start talking out of both ends of their digestive tract. Lemme iterate for you maybe it'll penetrate this time, GIVE EXAMPLE OF A SOCIETY MODERATED BY RELIGION WHICH REDUCED WAR.

tintingz:
The fallacy called faulty generalization.

Then you should inform atheists who hold this view of morality.
They are the ones that tell me these things

Where in athiest book is that written?

It doesn't have be in any book. It can be logically deduced from the atheistic perspective of the universe where all that exists is mindless matter functioning in an orderly manner for no apparent reason.

What athiest will tell you is morality is subjective in reality.

dalaman:

dalaman:

Racism is wrong only because our morality has evolved so much to the extent that we see it as wrong today. 300 years ago in America and Europe no body thought it was wrong. The people actually thought it was wrong to equate blacks to whites. I repeat society is what determines morality.

Even in Religions morality is relative or subjective, what's moral in this religion might be immoral in another religion.

Those are just disagreements. There's different beliefs about the age and shape of the earth, doesn't make the age or shape of this planet a matter of human opinion.

Then that society is unreasonable and attacking fallacy.

Then moral relativism, specifically cultural relativism is fallacious. Atheists need to stop arguing for this metaethical position.

Ok, if an atheist showed up and assist you in your financial need, and you said you hate him, is that moral?

No. But as i said before, if you were an moral relativist, specifically a cultural relativist then you would believe society determines what is moral or immoral, hence if that society approved of hating atheists then it would be moral in that culture according to this view of morality.

rekinomtla:

No. But as i said before, if you were an moral relativist, specifically a cultural relativist then you would believe society determines what is moral or immoral, hence if that society approved of hating atheists then it would be moral in that culture according to this view of morality.

All you are doing is attempting to give a dog a bad name so you can hang it. The fact that a society reaches an unreasonable conclusion on a particular topic of morality does not negate the fact that all morality is indeed subjective. Clearly human history shows that societies attempt to reason themselves into a state that promotes the good of the society, sometimes that reasoning fails and you get a Hitler and Germany in WWII or sometimes it succeeds and you get a United States of America.

You can please show me a society that has not at some point modified it's moral code.

LordReed:
LoL, were the title deeds for all of the land extending from Sinai(?) to Syria? And yes I expected it to be a walk in the park.
It was God who promised, why are men killing other men for it? Like if you can't see how bleeped up that is, you truly are blind.

LordReed, I don't know what bee you have in your bonnet.
I sure do see how fairked up it is, men are killing other men for this modern day patch of land, but guess what, it has nothing to do with God mayne.
You didn't know that, did you? Kikikiki ki.

LordReed:
LoL, this is just typical. When ever asked for actual evidence for the claims people like you make, they chicken out and start talking out of both ends of their digestive tract. Lemme iterate for you maybe it'll penetrate this time, GIVE EXAMPLE OF A SOCIETY MODERATED BY RELIGION WHICH REDUCED WAR.

Maybe if you stop shouting and stop being graphical, we can compare notes to see what is, how you see religion
and what is, how I know religion to originally have been.

You go first LordReed.
What is religion, exhaustedly and to the best of your understanding?

rekinomtla:


Then you should inform atheists who hold this view of morality.
They are the ones that tell me these things

It's still generalization.

It doesn't have be in any book. It can be logically deduced from the atheistic perspective of the universe where all that exists is mindless matter functioning in an orderly manner for no apparent reason.

This is still fallacy.

dalaman:

He's right, society determine morality but shouldn't totally control your morality.

Remember I used the word "totally".

E.g because Homosexuality is frowned at in Nigeria and are even jail doesn't mean it's moral to me, I find it Immoral to criminalize people because of thier sexual orientation.

Those are just disagreements. There's different beliefs about the age and shape of the earth, doesn't make the age or shape of this planet a matter of human opinion.

So what's the difference in disagreeing in something and holding subjective view about something?

Are you being dishonest or what?

Then moral relativism, specifically cultural relativism is fallacious. Atheists need to stop arguing for this metaethical position.

Wrong, subjective or relative morality is not fallacious but reality.

Look around, are you seeing people having same morality?

No. But as i said before, if you were an moral relativist, specifically a cultural relativist then you would believe society determines what is moral or immoral, hence if that society approved of hating atheists then it would be moral in that culture according to this view of morality.

Because a society approve a moral doesn't mean I should take it, I'm not a robot, gullible nor stupid.

Why do people protest? Why do we have gay activists, animal activists, women activists and so on?

MuttleyLaff:
LordReed, I don't know what bee you have in your bonnet.
I sure do see how fairked up it is, men are killing other men for this modern day patch of land, but guess what, it has nothing to do with God mayne.
You didn't know that, did you? Kikikiki ki.

Well you brought up God not me, don't be making claims you can't support.

Maybe if you stop shouting and stop being graphical, we can compare notes to see what is, how you see religion
and what is, how I know religion to originally have been.

You go first LordReed.
What is religion, exhaustedly and to the best of your understanding?

You should have said you wanted a metaphysical discussion.

Religion as I see it, is first, man's attempt to reconcile his experience with the complexity of his environment. Secondly, it is an institutionalization of a society's moral code and given divine imperative in other to make it sacrosanct and immutable.

Seun:

It is true for the majority of atheists. After escaping from religion, people tend to rely more on logic and reasoning.


It is immoral to me. Whenever people say that something is immoral, that’s precisely what they mean.

As an individual, I can explain why I believe an act is immoral and get other people to agree with me so that collectively we can find a way to discourage other people from engaging in the act. The only difference between us is that you feel the need to use scriptures to support your moral views and I do not. As far as I’m concerned, if an act causes more harm than good, takes away or limits people’s freedom and happiness, is unfair, needlessly cruel, very stupid, etc, then it’s probably morally wrong. Something that is wrong in most scenarios, such as adultery, may be acceptable in some scenarios, e.g in an open marriage. Morality at its best involves the active use of our big brains as social mammals.

I think this and other points raised are stupendously logical.

LordReed:
Well you brought up God not me, don't be making claims you can't support.

Yeah, because I can smell your motive from miles away mate.

LordReed:
You should have said you wanted a metaphysical discussion.

Religion as I see it, is first, man's attempt to reconcile his experience with the complexity of his environment. Secondly, it is an institutionalization of a society's moral code and given divine imperative in other to make it sacrosanct and immutable.

That's exactly what Paul was going about doing when he was Saul

Guess what, the word "religion" has changed its meaning from what is originally was, being about benevolence, thoughtful consideration and generosity for other people in need

Having compassion makes you or lets you become less prejudiced, less extreme, less intense or violent to want to antagonise or fight wars with another

Yup, compassion cuts right through Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, New Age etcetera

Watch this, do you ever ask about someone's belief or unbelief first before offering or extending your compassion to them, especially when in time of need?

If anyone wants to do religion, then compassion, is the religion, on record, deemed pure and faultless by God

Whatever the front, however it is painted and how you've just described religion to be,
the truth and fact is, what is fronted as pure and faultless religion in today's world, isnt it.

Religion, that is pure and faultless, is about, not, how regular one prays, is not about regular congregated attendance.
Religion, that is pure and faultless, is not, about wearing hijab or burka

Before what the world has become today, a priest & levite (i.e. "church" worker) had been known to slip up on what pure and faultless religion is

Anything less than practising, pure and faultless religion, is not true and so thereby is false religion.
If it's not compassion centric it is false impure and faulty religion