Play
Multi-Player
Coins
Community
Settings
Help
Community   Maps   Forum   Mail   Ladders   Clans   Recent Games
Sign In | Sign Up
<< Back to Off-topic Forum   

Posts 1 - 26 of 26   
Secularism: Should it be legal?: 11/25/2015 07:44:16


[WOLF] Colonel H Cardwell
Level 50
Report
Secularists have no morals, and therefore are more likely to commit atrocious acts. Your opinions, please!
Secularism: Should it be legal?: 11/25/2015 08:16:46


Blank
Level 36
Report
I think everyone should have the freedom to believe in anything they want.
Even if they're fucking wrong
Secularism: Should it be legal?: 11/25/2015 11:34:34


The Mad Japanese
Level 51
Report
yes.......... yes to Secularism

Edited 11/25/2015 11:34:47
Secularism: Should it be legal?: 11/25/2015 14:23:17


Tiny Koala
Level 56
Report
This is why Sweden, the Netherlands, and Japan are such hellish shitpiles - too many atheists.
Secularism: Should it be legal?: 11/25/2015 19:39:59


[AOE] JaiBharat909
Level 56
Report
Secularism is needed for democratic continuance but religion is needed for civic morality. Its a tough trade-off on how much society remains secular. The more secular societies become, the more willing they are to accept new progressive notions of morality that are often based on gray zones of relativity.
Secularism: Should it be legal?: 11/25/2015 19:45:48

[wolf]japan77
Level 57
Report
Umm sure, having secular persons is totally bad, why don't you go live in Japan or Scandinavia, and then report back


ALSO, f*ck organized religion, it starts all the d*mn wars.

Infact, this entire terrorism thing is radical organized Islamists fighting organized christians
for the most part
Secularism: Should it be legal?: 11/25/2015 19:49:24


[AOE] JaiBharat909
Level 56
Report
"Organized Christians"?

This phenomenon hasn't existed since maybe WWII. The fight against ISIS involves at least 60 countries, many of which are Muslim majority. Get your facts straight. Blaming organized religion for all wars is such a cop-out and generalization that is an abhorrent disregard of history's complexity. Geopolitics, economics, and socio-cultural factors are just as powerful catalysts for war.
Secularism: Should it be legal?: 11/25/2015 20:27:52


Жұқтыру
Level 55
Report
This phenomenon hasn't existed since maybe WWII.


Untaught swine, there are organised Christians killing others for not being Christian in the first place, today; one of the worst massacres in the last 50 years was made by the Christian Lebanese militia for not being Christian. Frankly, come on, Christian violent extremism is not even being catalysed, like the Islamic extremism is, so you can't say modern Christianity is a clean slate.
Secularism: Should it be legal?: 11/25/2015 20:52:18


Eklipse {TJC}
Level 56
Report
Blaming organized religion for all wars is such a cop-out and generalization that is an abhorrent disregard of history's complexity. Geopolitics, economics, and socio-cultural factors are just as powerful catalysts for war.

I wish more people understood this. Violence and war are very complex subjects with no easy answer or explanation. When your knee-jerk reaction is to go: "Hurr-Durr religion is evul" it shows that you have a very poor grasp of history and politics.
Secularism: Should it be legal?: 11/25/2015 23:02:19


The Hysterical Koala
Level 57
Report
religion is a easy way to get people riled up, so it looks like it can be the main reason even if it is not necessarily.

if secularists have no morals, then gods have a tendency to be evil as well.
Secularism: Should it be legal?: 11/25/2015 23:10:13


Angry Koala
Level 57
Report
^ Totally agree with my Koala bro.
Secularism: Should it be legal?: 11/25/2015 23:28:48


[Wolf] Relmcheatham
Level 56
Report
ALSO, f*ck organized religion, it starts all the d*mn wars.

Most wars are not started by religion, this is a common mistake due to the hatred in the middle east and the crusades


Infact, this entire terrorism thing is radical organized Islamists

here is what Ban Ki Moon (leader of the UN) said they are "The Un-Islimic Non-State"

fighting organized christians

Yes, Because Syria,Israel,Jordan, and all other middle eastern countries fighting ISIS are dominated by Christians XD
Secularism: Should it be legal?: 11/26/2015 03:50:50

E Masterpierround
Level 56
Report
Even if you don't believe that organized religion is responsible for wars, you have to admit that organized religion is a damn good tool for terrible people to use against others.

Anything that provides an inescapable consequence for disobedience, and has an established record of meddling in everyday affairs can be used to control lots of people, and thus is dangerous in the wrong hands.

Also, do people actually believe that religion is the only possible source of morality? I thought that belief was a comedic strawman.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zxc20saM8DA

^^good song with vague relevance to the topic^^

Edited 11/26/2015 03:55:42
Secularism: Should it be legal?: 11/26/2015 04:20:59


knyte 
Level 58
Report
How do you ban a belief system? I don't see how a government has the power to actually change what people believe- maybe it can get away with penalizing certain thought systems and worldviews, but that alone comes with a lot of side effects (especially on the economic side- at least historically, attempts by populations to eliminate minority viewpoints and belief systems have often disproportionately harmed their society's "intellectual" class).
Secularism: Should it be legal?: 11/26/2015 04:41:45


[AOE] JaiBharat909
Level 56
Report
The destruction of minority viewpoints isn't always based on a religious motive though. The red army and the communist government of China purged the Intellectual class (which was more pro-west) because they saw their views as a threat to their rule, but it wasn't based on religion...it was based on power politics and the need to unequivocally equalize economic power.

Edited 11/26/2015 04:42:01
Secularism: Should it be legal?: 11/26/2015 04:54:00


knyte 
Level 58
Report
I'm not challenging that or claiming that intellectual classes tend uniformly toward certainly viewpoints.

Regardless of whatever it was based on, the justifications supplied by the Red Army weren't about control- instead, just as Colonel and others are classifying certain groups of people as "amoral"/etc. in this thread, the Soviets applied other blanket classifications to the groups they persecuted in order to dehumanize them.

Basically, it's kind of interesting what happens when we get so caught up in our own ideologies that we forget that the people who disagree with us are still people whose lives, thoughts, and experiences are just as valid as our own.

Edited 11/26/2015 04:54:25
Secularism: Should it be legal?: 11/26/2015 05:00:45


The Man Who'd Buy Spain
Level 29
Report
With no emotion to get in the way, logic can rule supreme. Secularists FTW!
Secularism: Should it be legal?: 11/26/2015 05:13:02

E Masterpierround
Level 56
Report
Secularism =/= logical and unemotional thinking. I know plenty of secularists who base almost all of their beliefs on emotions, sometimes illogically.
Secularism: Should it be legal?: 11/26/2015 05:33:43


Genghis 
Level 52
Report
SECULARISTS ARE NOTHING BUT DAMN COMMIES AND SOCIALISTS! THEY WANT TO RE ELECT BUSH AND OBAMA! THEY'D HAVE US COMMIT INCEST WITHIN OUR IMMEDIATE FAMILY ! THEY'D GIVE US COURSERS FOR COUSINS AND GENNETS FOR GERMANS! OUR SONS WOULD BARK AND MEOW AT US! THEY'D TRY TO TAKE AWAY GOD! THE ONLY WAY TO PREVENT THEM FROM SPREADING IS TO TAKE AWAY ALL THE SPERM THEY HAVE SO THAT THEY CAN'T REPRODUCE! THUS, I SUGGEST EVERY SECULAR PERSON GETS SOMEBODY TO SUCK THEM OFF TILL THEY'RE INCAPABLE OF REPRODUCTION! COME ON GUYS WHO VOLUNTEERS FIRST?

Secularism: Should it be legal?: 11/26/2015 05:47:02


Major General Smedley Butler
Level 49
Report
Hereditary Theocracy is best, Montenegro had it and lasted against the Musselturks for hundreds of years.
Secularism: Should it be legal?: 11/26/2015 08:22:49


Varakreivi
Level 56
Report
So you are saying that secularists are more likely to commit atrocious acts than non-secularists? Maybe I missed something? Because frankly, looking at the recent newsreel, that statement doesn't seem very obvious. If you have some data that proves otherwise, now could be the time to bring it forward.

And why do you think secularists don't have morals? On the contrary, it seems to me that some non-secularists have quite dodgy morals - they just take them from some ancient book, instead of actually questioning and challenging them.
Secularism: Should it be legal?: 11/26/2015 15:32:38


[AOE] JaiBharat909
Level 56
Report
I really think Theodemocracy is probably a valid and effective form of governance. Hereditary forms of government can lead to problem, often because there are huge internal and domestic convulsions over supplying heirs and the order of succession. Moreover, hereditary forms of government are in its essence discriminatory by emphasizing a "dominant family" which is better than everyone else by the sheer fact of their genetic code.
Secularism: Should it be legal?: 11/27/2015 23:06:19


[WOLF] Colonel H Cardwell
Level 50
Report
You cannot compare Scandinavia to the Middle East, as any conclusion drawn from the comparison would be based upon the false presumption that certain other effects remain the same. Different things have different consequences in different environments.

Let's be more reasonable and compare different countries within the Middle East and North Africa... generally the least stable countries are the ones that can be considered more secular; at least before their destabilisation.
Here is a list of my personal view of the most politically stable Middle Eastern nations in descending order (please note that this is my viewpoint and will most likely be arguable):

Oman (very popular Sultan unifying the country)
UAE (very rich country with relatively liberal laws surrounded by allies)
Tunisia (fairly peaceful nation recently transitioned into a democracy)
Pakistan (very powerful military)
Morocco (Western-style constitutional monarchy and liberal laws)
Jordan (same as Morocco)
Kuwait (small country with very little opposition)
Iran (limited democracy however growing liberalism)
Saudi Arabia (popular leadership however Shiites, ISIL and war in Yemen are destabilizing factors)
Bahrain (unpopular government however US and UK military presence prevents escalation)
Qatar (limited democracy however young, inexperienced and assertive leadership is destabilizing)
Algeria (50-50 ethnic division and highly contested politics)
Turkey (Surrounded by hostile nations, civil war in southeast and increasingly authoritarian government)
Egypt (strong leadership however continuous threats from various terrorist groups and threat from Sinai andLibya)
Afghanistan (weak security and lack of popular support in the face of a resurgent Taliban and increasing threat from ISIL)
Lebanon (conflict from all sides including Hezbollah, ISIL and alQaeda)
Yemen (ongoing civil war following partially successful coup by Iranian-funded rebels)
Libya (widespread infighting and threat from terrorism)
Iraq (Half the country controlled by ISIL nutcases and the other by equally nutty Shiite militia)
Syria (three-way all-out civil war currently being waged)

If we look at those countries at the bottom of the list, we generally see more secularist countries such as Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan and towards the top of the list more Islamic countries such as Saudi Arabia, Iran and Kuwait.

Scandinavia has a completely unique cultural, religious, demographic and geographical makeup which makes it incomparable to other regions.

Thanks and have a nice day.
Colonel.
Secularism: Should it be legal?: 11/27/2015 23:28:47


[WOLF] Colonel H Cardwell
Level 50
Report
In my opinion, the best form of governance for different regions are different, which is why I oppose federalism, imperialism and colonisation.

South America-
Presidential republic. Socialism.

West Indies-
Constitutional monarchy. Capitalism.

North America-
Presidential republic. Capitalism.

Western Europe-
Presidential Republic. Capitalism.

Northern Europe-
Constitutional monarchy. Capitalism.

Central Europe-
Presidential republic. Capitalism.

Eastern Europe-
Parliamentary republic. Socialism.

Russia/the Stans-
Presidential Republic. Socialism.

The Orient-
Constitutional monarchy. Socialism.

East Indies-
Presidential Republic. Socialism.

Muslim World-
Absolute monarchy. Capitalism.

Main Africa-
Presidential republic. Socialism/Capitalism.

Australasia-
Constitutional monarchy. Capitalism.

Every system mentioned above is presumed democratic.

Feel free to contradict any of the above.

Have a nice day.
Colonel.
Secularism: Should it be legal?: 12/1/2015 09:00:25


Varakreivi
Level 56
Report
Even if the government of a country is secular, you can't say the problems of the country are automatically because of secularism. In your list of countries, this seems to be the case in almost every instance, and your list actually contradicts your claims. Or can you show me one contry from it where the conflict is not happening foremost because of religious zealotism?

Also I don't follow your logic when you describe Iraq as "Half the country controlled by ISIL nutcases and the other by equally nutty Shiite militia", and then say it's a secular country?
Secularism: Should it be legal?: 12/1/2015 22:52:50


Tiny Koala
Level 56
Report
Here's an interesting map that shows the proportion of non-religious people by country:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f0/Irreligion_map.png

I think there is at least one mistake on the map - Azerbaijan is too dark.

However, we can get a pretty good idea of what places are very religious, and what places are very secular.

Very religious places include Africa, the Middle East with the exception of Israel, Southeast Asia with the exception of Vietnam, and some countries in Central and South America.

Very irreligious places include China, Vietnam, Japan; Scandinavia; Northern Europe from France to Russia, with the notable exception of Catholic Poland; to a lesser extent, Canada, Australia, and Southern Europe, not including the Balkans north of Greece and Bulgaria.

Here's an interesting article that asks the question, "Are Prisoners Less Likely to be Atheists?":
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/are-prisoners-less-likely-to-be-atheists/

The headline figure is that, atheists (a narrower category than the "irreligious" I discussed above) make up about 1% of the population of the U.S., and about 0.1% of the federal prison population.


So, on the whole, it seems that secularism is positively correlated with healthy societies and moral behavior.

Edited 12/2/2015 12:36:36
Posts 1 - 26 of 26   

Contact | About WarLight | Play Risk Online | Multiplayer Strategy Game | Challenge Friends, Win Money | Skill Game | Terms of Service