Could Religious belief be considered ...

Could Religious belief be considered to be a Mental Disorder?

There are 173 comments on the News24 story from May 9, 2013, titled Could Religious belief be considered to be a Mental Disorder?. In it, News24 reports that:

Since it is so close to Friday and everyone needs some cheering up, let's see if we can all see the humor in this one.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at News24.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#41 May 14, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
I see you enjoying factually destroying him. He is not that far away from having to switch screen names :))
<quoted text>
You will note the low count on his current one.

:)

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#42 May 14, 2013
You'd think they wouldn't waste a new screen name only to say the same idiotic sht as before.
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
You will note the low count on his current one.
:)

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#43 May 14, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
You'd think they wouldn't waste a new screen name only to say the same idiotic sht as before.
<quoted text>
Well... they are seriously brain-damaged. So creative thinking is not something they are capable of...

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#44 May 14, 2013
Doing the same nonsense under a different screen name and hoping for a different result! Lol!

It's like they think... Well my logical fallacies failed under my old screen name... But under a new one they will be solo gold! Oh Magoo you've done it again.
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>Well... they are seriously brain-damaged. So creative thinking is not something they are capable of...

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#46 May 14, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Doing the same nonsense under a different screen name and hoping for a different result! Lol!
It's like they think... Well my logical fallacies failed under my old screen name... But under a new one they will be solo gold! Oh Magoo you've done it again.
<quoted text>
Well, it's how they were brain-damaged after all: repetitive indoctrination of the given lie, enough times such that the recipient forgets it was a lie, and begins to accept the lie as not-a-lie.

So I suppose they try the same method on us--

-- the thing is? We're on to their strategy, and not vulnerable to it.

But like the mindless robots they resemble, they keep going.

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

#47 May 14, 2013
BeHereNow wrote:
<quoted text>Hey, serial killers are a small minority, get lots of attention.
I mean like 13%- you think those are big numbers?
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/...
And just a reminder, you need to respect your elders, whether I'm 14 or 15 is not the point.
From a statistical point of view, 13% is a vary large minority, eqivalent, for instance, to the African-American subpopulation in the U.S. and larger than most other minority subpopulations. The largest minority reported by the Census Bureau is the Latino subgroup at 16.7%.

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

#48 May 14, 2013
BeHereNow wrote:
<quoted text>This is annother one of those cases where an atheist shows their ignorance.
If atheists are only 13% of the world population, reason, and logic, tells me that most criminals would be religionists.
It is called statistics.
On the other had you think that it is a great marvel that 13% of the populaion is a minority in the prisons.
Somehow that speaks to the nobel nature of atheists.
Yes, logic like that is typical for your group.
I learned that is third grade.
The point, though, is that nonbelievers are though by some to offend at lower rates that that of believers. I haven't seen any convincing data that supports that assertion. The federal government doesn't collect religious population data because of the prohibition that Congress placed on the Census Bureau early in the twentieth century. What little data we do have comes from state prison systems, and most of the documentation does not meet professional standards for statisticians. So my take on that is that we simply don't know which group offends at higher rates for lack of reliable data.

You ought to take an introductory course in statistics--you are obviously interested in the subject, but you don't seem to know much about it. In such a course, you will learn the basics of statistical analysis, how studies are designed and executed, and how to tell whether statistic data has been created using methods that are up to standard. It will protect you from accepting bad information in the same way that an an introductory course in logic helps people to use sound logic and to recognize fallacies as they come up. A good grasp of statistics is an essential intellectual tool.

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

#49 May 14, 2013
BeHereNow wrote:
<quoted text>Well the rational answer is obvious.
Atheist are better educated, have a higher IQ.- you tell us without substantiation.
It seems obvious why they have a low incarceration rate.
They are successful criminals – do not get caught – do not get incarcerated.
This logic stuff seems so easy, and yet – those like you – seem to not be able to have a creative thought.
Or maybe you want to claim that even though they are smarter, better educated, have a higher IQ, they still get caught by the ‘general public’ police force, who are not as smart, not as educated.
Is that your position?
~~
And do I really have to mention to you that those who were confirmed atheists on the outside,'find god' once incarcerrated.
Jailhouse conversion are notorious - but you seem to be unaware of this.
And believe it or not, some of thsoe jailhouse conversion don't seem to hold up once released.
Right back to serial killing, child molesting, and those other pasttimes.
Not that the religionists do not participate in the same things.
Up until recently, the best data that compared education levels in religious subgroups the unaffiliated into one subgroup called "nones." But a recent study by the Public Religion Research Institute conducted their 2012 American Values Survey by subdividing that group into the "unattached believers," the "seculars," and "atheists and agnostics." Page 17 of the report shows a huge range of educational attainment withing the larger group, atheists/agnostics attaining somewhat higher levels than seculars and much higher levels than the unattached believers, putting them in the same league as Hindus, Buddhists, and Jews, who have attained much higher levels than other religious subgroups.

http://publicreligion.org/site/wp-content/upl...

In general, higher levels of education do seem to correlate with lower levels of criminality, but it's hard to pin down other correlations--cultural and/or sociological--that might explain that association in a larger context. There's a lot of unexplored territory, and I advise caution in trusting one's intuitions to cover any new ground.

Sometimes the most intelligent response is, "I don't know."

Since: Feb 07

Location hidden

#50 May 15, 2013
Jeremiah Wright.

“Sombrero Galaxy”

Since: Jan 10

I'm An Illegal Alien

#51 May 15, 2013
Religion is some form of delusion.
spudgun

Stoke-on-trent, UK

#53 May 15, 2013
maxix wrote:
<quoted text>
So is Marxism which is based on Atheism.
Atheism was a small component of the Marxist economic and socio-political worldview. Just because Marxism is seen as outdated does not invalid Atheism whatsoever.
EdSed

Hamilton, UK

#54 May 15, 2013
maxix wrote:
<quoted text>
So is Marxism which is based on Atheism.
Marxism isn't based on atheism any more than Nazism was based on religion. Marxists simply found no way to use religion to advance that worldview.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxism

Atheists aren't less moral than religionists. Zionism and Islamism are at the root of some modern conflicts and they are religion-based. There's also the example of Sunni and Shia tribalism.
Lincoln

United States

#55 May 15, 2013
EdSed wrote:
<quoted text>Marxism isn't based on atheism any more than Nazism was based on religion. Marxists simply found no way to use religion to advance that worldview.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxism
Atheists aren't less moral than religionists. Zionism and Islamism are at the root of some modern conflicts and they are religion-based. There's also the example of Sunni and Shia tribalism.
Zionism and Islamism often political.

Red Guard under Trotsky killed three million and were atheist.

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#56 May 15, 2013
Is there any possible way you could post this again in English?

No seriously, read your post out loud. The sentence structure and grammar are beyond atrocious.

I suppose that's why you rely on stealing the writings of others as NS busted you doing yes?

Plus you really need to look up words like Zionism and Islamism before making a bigger jackass out of yourself. If you understood these words you would comprehend how childish your post sounds.

Are you saying the red guard killed atheists? Or at you saying they were atheists who killed non atheists? Your English is so bad your statement is wrong from the outset. Plus they killed both atheists and believers as one who understood history would know.... I suppose we should wait until you can post in English before fixing your historical errors.

You're welcome.
Lincoln wrote:
<quoted text>Zionism and Islamism often political.

Red Guard under Trotsky killed three million and were atheist.
EdSed

Hamilton, UK

#57 May 15, 2013
Lincoln wrote:
<quoted text>
Zionism and Islamism often political.
Red Guard under Trotsky killed three million and were atheist.
That rubbish has been addressed ad nauseum.

There would be solvable politics and no point in Islamism or Zionism without religion. You can't tell Zionists or Islamists there is 'no holyland'. They could share it as humans but for their tribal religious divisions.

Religion = superstition. It's divisive and outdated and you know it. You have your own "Judeo-Christian" ideology that is just as bad as Trotsky's views or Zionism or Islamism. From a humanist point of view, they all look similarly tribal and discredited.

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#58 May 15, 2013
I am impressed that you were even able to translate his non English gibberish.

Naturally he has no evidence to refute you or even back up his poorly worded claims.
EdSed wrote:
<quoted text>That rubbish has been addressed ad nauseum.

There would be solvable politics and no point in Islamism or Zionism without religion. You can't tell Zionists or Islamists there is 'no holyland'. They could share it as humans but for their tribal religious divisions.

Religion = superstition. It's divisive and outdated and you know it. You have your own "Judeo-Christian" ideology that is just as bad as Trotsky's views or Zionism or Islamism. From a humanist point of view, they all look similarly tribal and discredited.
Lincoln

United States

#59 May 15, 2013
EdSed wrote:
<quoted text>That rubbish has been addressed ad nauseum.
There would be solvable politics and no point in Islamism or Zionism without religion. You can't tell Zionists or Islamists there is 'no holyland'. They could share it as humans but for their tribal religious divisions.
Religion = superstition. It's divisive and outdated and you know it. You have your own "Judeo-Christian" ideology that is just as bad as Trotsky's views or Zionism or Islamism. From a humanist point of view, they all look similarly tribal and discredited.
"That rubbish has been "addressed" ad nauseum. Of course addressed is Not proof.:-)

Trotsky and the atheist Red Guards killed three million" between 1917 and 1923.

The Soviet Union was the first state to have, as an ideological objective, the elimination of religion and its replacement with universal atheism. The communist regime confiscated religious property, ridiculed religion, harassed believers, and propagated atheism in schools. The confiscation of religious assets was often based on accusations of illegal accumulation of wealth.

The vast majority of people in the Russian empire were, at the time of the revolution, religious believers, whereas the communists aimed to break the power of all religious institutions and eventually replace religious belief with atheism.

"Science" was counterposed to "religious superstition" in the media and in academic writing. The main religions of pre-revolutionary Russia persisted throughout the entire Soviet period, but they were only tolerated within certain limits. Generally, this meant that believers were free to worship in private and in their respective religious buildings (churches, mosques, etc.), but public displays of religion outside of such designated areas were prohibited. In addition, religious institutions were not allowed to express their views in any type of mass media, and many religious buildings were demolished or used for other purposes.

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#60 May 15, 2013
You're stealing the works of others again without posting the link and giving credit to the original author.

Are you unable to understand the red guard killed atheist and believer alike?

You should work on your English before trying to argue historical matters in English. Perhaps if you understood English with a better proficiency you wouldn't look so ignorant yes?

Yes.

Peace :)
Lincoln wrote:
<quoted text>"That rubbish has been "addressed" ad nauseum. Of course addressed is Not proof.:-)

Trotsky and the atheist Red Guards killed three million" between 1917 and 1923.

The Soviet Union was the first state to have, as an ideological objective, the elimination of religion and its replacement with universal atheism. The communist regime confiscated religious property, ridiculed religion, harassed believers, and propagated atheism in schools. The confiscation of religious assets was often based on accusations of illegal accumulation of wealth.

The vast majority of people in the Russian empire were, at the time of the revolution, religious believers, whereas the communists aimed to break the power of all religious institutions and eventually replace religious belief with atheism.

"Science" was counterposed to "religious superstition" in the media and in academic writing. The main religions of pre-revolutionary Russia persisted throughout the entire Soviet period, but they were only tolerated within certain limits. Generally, this meant that believers were free to worship in private and in their respective religious buildings (churches, mosques, etc.), but public displays of religion outside of such designated areas were prohibited. In addition, religious institutions were not allowed to express their views in any type of mass media, and many religious buildings were demolished or used for other purposes.
EdSed

Hamilton, UK

#61 May 15, 2013
Lincoln wrote:
<quoted text>
"That rubbish has been "addressed" ad nauseum. Of course addressed is Not proof.:-)
Trotsky and the atheist Red Guards killed three million" between 1917 and 1923.
The Soviet Union was the first state to have, as an ideological objective, the elimination of religion and its replacement with universal atheism. The communist regime confiscated religious property, ridiculed religion, harassed believers, and propagated atheism in schools. The confiscation of religious assets was often based on accusations of illegal accumulation of wealth.
The vast majority of people in the Russian empire were, at the time of the revolution, religious believers, whereas the communists aimed to break the power of all religious institutions and eventually replace religious belief with atheism.
"Science" was counterposed to "religious superstition" in the media and in academic writing. The main religions of pre-revolutionary Russia persisted throughout the entire Soviet period, but they were only tolerated within certain limits. Generally, this meant that believers were free to worship in private and in their respective religious buildings (churches, mosques, etc.), but public displays of religion outside of such designated areas were prohibited. In addition, religious institutions were not allowed to express their views in any type of mass media, and many religious buildings were demolished or used for other purposes.
Fine. You believe that atheism is the basis of trotskyism and red soviet communism and that religion isn't seriously divisive. I think most people will see that the Soviets simply couldn't use religion to their advantage. So we needn't discredit your posts as I think most reasonable people (religious or not) will conclude that you do it yourself.

Religion is still superstition based and divisive. Atheists are still not less moral than religionists - except to bigots perhaps.
http://www.positiveatheism.org/writ/ghwbush.h...
spudgun

Stoke-on-trent, UK

#62 May 15, 2013
EdSed wrote:
<quoted text>
Religion = superstition. It's divisive and outdated and you know it. You have your own "Judeo-Christian" ideology that is just as bad as Trotsky's views or Zionism or Islamism. From a humanist point of view, they all look similarly tribal and discredited.
+1 good point

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 24 min Into The Night 61,531
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 2 hr Subduction Zone 2,709
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 4 hr Aura Mytha 28,325
The Dumbest Thing Posted by a Godbot (Jun '10) Mar 24 IB DaMann 5,970
Atheist Humor (Aug '09) Mar 22 Eagle 12 452
Deconversion Mar 20 Eagle 12 138
News Quotes from Famous Freethinkers (Aug '12) Mar 18 Eagle 12 2,043
More from around the web