From: grante@aquarius.rosemount.com (Grant Edwards)
Subject: Re: Reincarnation
Reply-To: grante@aquarius.rosemount.com (Grant Edwards)
Organization: Rosemount, Inc.
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 16:51:11 GMT

ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata - FSO) writes:
:
: >How does one decide which religious beliefs are "good" ones?  Yours, I
: >assume, is one of the "good" ones that deserves to be defended, while
: >religions that include reincarnation shouldn't be defended?
: 
: I never said that anything should or should not be defended, only
: what *I* choose to defend.  Your bias is really showing in your
: posting!  Only *you* can determine which religious beliefs *you*
: should agree with.  Because you can't make up your mind, doesn't
: mean that everyone elses religious beliefs are bogus or
: necessarily superstition.
:

Yes, my bias is showing -- I have made up my mind (I thought it was
pretty obvious) and think that all religion is bogus.  As for
religious beliefs not being superstition, look up the definition of
superstition:

 "Any belief or attitude, based on fear or ignorance, that is
  inconsistant with the known laws of science..."

Sounds like religion to me.

: >: You see all religious beliefs in a certain light.  Do you expect
: >: everyone to see it the same way that you do?
: >
: >Yes, I see all religious beliefs in certain light.  I expect
: >_rational_ people to see that all religious beliefs are pretty much
: >equally bogus.  Some religions are a little more pragmatic than others
: >when it comes to getting on with life, but there still isn't any
: >verifiable basis to most of the beliefs.
: 
: Indeed, so all people who have genuine religious beliefs are
: irrational according to your statement.  How very sad. :(

Yes, it is sad.

: >In direct answer to your question, no, I do not expect everyone to see
: >it the same way I do.
:
: You just called all people who didn't see all religion as equally bogus:
: not _rational_.  The above statement is in direct contradiction to this.

No, it just means that I don't expect everybody to be rational.  I
would _like_ everybody to be rational, but I certainly don't expect it
based on past experiences.

: >Why can't you be nice to and cooperatre with people because you have
: >thought about it and decided it is benificial to everybody involved?
: >Why do you need some supernatural being to tell you what all of the
: >other social animals in the world have figured out?
: 
: Again you are reading things into my statement that I never said.  When
: did I say that religion is a prerequsite for obeying the law?  Please
: reread my comments again in light of your previous comments.

You said:

    For example, believing that this is the one and only life might
    tend to make me more selfish of myself having no care or
    consideration for anyone else.  I might even have fun breaking
    every social law in the book.

I took that to mean that without a religious belief in some sort of
afterlife there was no reason to obey laws or be nice to people.  My
apologies if I misinterpreted, but I've heard many people argue that
without religion there is no basis for ethics or morality.  Your
statement sounded like that arguement to me.

: >: BTW, I don't believe that your typical person in the US who
: >: believes in reincarnation is poor at all. That explanation works fine
: >: for third world contries, but one must dig deeper for an explanation
: >: in the US.  Perhaps there is a spiritual hunger out there?
: >
: >What is "spiritual hunger"?  A need to belong to a social group?  The
: >need to feel that your life isn't meaningless?  Fine, join a club,
: >join the Peace Corps, join the army, take up a hobby, have a family,
: >whatever.  Or admit that your life _is_ meaningless, mine is!  I like
: >my life just fine, but I have no illusions that there is some great
: >meaning or purpose for it.
: 
: There are plenty of people who are in the Peace Corps or army, have hobbies
: or families and still have their spiritual needs met by religion.  I think
: you are confusing social needs with spiritual needs.  

Could be. The churches and religions that I am familiar with seemed to
be social organizations, most of the people who participated did so
for social reasons -- they certainly had no familiarity with the
theology of their churches.  Perhaps I've not met anybody with
"genuine religious beliefs."

--
Grant Edwards                                 |Yow!  I have many CHARTS and
Rosemount Inc.                                |DIAGRAMS..
                                              |
grante@aquarius.rosemount.com                 |
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic