Kitchen Garden Forum

Alan likes to mock the Christians because they wanted to free the Holy Land from Muslims, the first and second world wars were also fought to preserve our way of life. A way of life that has evolved from the Christian religion (believe in it or not). Our laws are fundamentaly based on the 10 commandments and I can not think of any Christian countries including America that promote stoning to death or wishing death to anyone who writes a book or draws a cartoon that they do not like.

Its all too easy to find hypocricy in our way of lives but I would sooner live with its freedoms than choise the altrenatives, communism-no religion and no freedom, facism-no freedom and Islam-no other religion and no freedom.

Also Alan, since when were atheists all peace loving?

Barney

Hi Barney

Thought for the day:

With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil — that takes religion.

Stephen Weinberg (Physicist and Nobel Prize winner)

Once again Alan you enjoy , as is your right, to take a snide swipe at those people who believe in a God or religion.

However, do remember at the end, you can never prove them wrong but they can surely prove you wrong.

Peace be with you.

(I'm hedging my bets)

Barney

Well said Barney, and Alan, surely that's illogical? How can they be good people if they are doing evil ? In my experience we are all (myself included) capable of both good and bad, and forgiveness, tolerance and a good lead or example, is more helpful than being critical and judgemental.

Hi Barney.
Your comment:

However, do remember at the end, you can never prove them wrong but they can surely prove you wrong.

They can only prove Alan wrong by their belief in their religion.
To religious people of all persuasions an Atheist is always wrong but he/she are entitled not to believe in religion. It is their right!
So on that score there is no right or wrong.
In my humble opinion most religions can be proved wrong in some aspects of their philosophy.
On this subject I wish to remain neutral but reserve the right to comment.
JB.

Hello Johnboy

I think that you are missing the point Johnboy.

However, do remember at the end, you can never prove them wrong but they can surely prove you wrong.

On our life on earth no one can prove that God does not exist and no one can prove God does exist, it is all a matter of faith or not.

When we die however, if God does exist then the believers will prove their case to the non believers, but if there is no after life the non believer can not prove their case to the believer.

That's why I hedge my bets.

Barney

I really did not intend that my original post about hypocrisy should develop into a religious discussion, or even a discussion about democracy. But since it has...

What you propose Barney is a line which has been proposed and refuted by much greater brains than mine and yours. In the history of philosophy it goes under the name Pascal's Wager.

It only really makes sense if you assume a supreme being (all-knowing, all-powerful) who has not the capacity to see through "just-in-case" bets-hedging. At least that the simplest logical way of looking at it.

Hello Alan

The reason your posting wandered off topic is because you made a mocking remark regarding the Crusades.

It is nothing to do with brains. Are you telling me that only less intelligent people believe?

If God does not exist you die forever, however people who believe in a greater power believe life goes on after death and we face our judgement, if that is true then the belivers get the last laugh.

One should believe (because that is all it is) what you want to believe based on ones' experience of life and let others believe what they want to believe.

There are many examples on this forum where you have sought to give your view of religous people. I am just saying that in my view I'd never be so cock sure and rule out the presence of a God.

Barney

Hi Barney,
I guess this is another Mmmmmmm?
JB.

I think I'm on the same wavelength as Alan and Johnboy. You can be a good person without any religious beliefs, and isn't it better to be kind and caring throughout your life without expecting anything back.

Religions cause more trouble worldwide than anything else, and in many cases it is just used as an excuse by (usually) young men to fight and be nasty to other people. Or in other cases older men use it for power and to control people - particularly to prevent women having any freedom.

I'm now going into my garden to appreciate and enjoy my lovely surroundings and commune with nature (and give the hens their afternoon treat).

Hi Plumpudding

I enjoyed reading your post. I agree wholeheatedly with every word. The last paragraph echoes my feelings exactly

Barney

Much as I would like to let the matter rest, I feel I owe you the courtesy of a reply.

The reason your posting wandered off topic is because you made a mocking remark regarding the Crusades.

Not so, Barney; the first mention of religion was actually this from you:

it amases me why we put up with the double standards of many muslims.

It seems perfectly in order for them to burn the American and British flags, effigies of Western leaders and wish all us infidels total damnation but woe-betide if anyone hurts their over sensitive feelings.

Bring back the crusades!

It is nothing to do with brains.

That belittles the whole of evolved humanity.

Are you telling me that only less intelligent people believe?

Yes, I suppose I am. The majority of scientists appear to be atheists.

If God does not exist you die forever

I can cope with that.

people who believe in a greater power believe life goes on after death and we face our judgement, if that is true then the belivers get the last laugh.

I'm actually quite happy not to subscribe to a belief that includes the "last laugh" idea.

There are many examples on this forum where you have sought to give your view of religous people.

I can't think of them; if you could point me in the right direction I will certainly consider them.

Yours in humanity and tolerance

Alan

Back on Topic.

To suggest the Windsors have their wealth removed by Act of Parliament is of course an impossibility.
Some of their wealth belongs to the Office of the Crown and is not theirs but the State's.
Some of their wealth is theirs.

Any taking of wealth would of course be subject to the Human Rights Act - which would I suggest mean full recompense for any loss.. at OUR expense.

And as for dividing their wealth amongst the citizens... within 1 year I suggest half the population would have spent/drunk their share and be no better off...

Hi all,
If I may make a small comment? I decided long ago that I had to be a disbeliever, because I reasoned thus:
If God made the Universe, who made God?
Believers say, No one - God was always there and always will be.
So I say: OK, if that can apply to God, why not to the Universe? - it just "is", and always will be.
Perhaps the Universe is God? Perhaps when we die we go through a Black Hole into another dimension? If so I'm pretty sure that "it" doesn't care tuppence about what we do or don't do - but then "caring "is purely a human invention, and so are all the other terms and concepts we use - "beginning', "end", "consciousness", "humanity" , "religion", "God"! Like the noise a gun makes when there is no-one to hear it, it doesn't exist.
Anyway, if God exists can anyone suggest an answer to "Why does he exist"?
John N

Anyway, if God exists can anyone suggest an answer to "Why does he exist"?

Simple.. We exist. Ergo someone or something created us.. Call it "God"...

madasafish wrote:Anyway, if God exists can anyone suggest an answer to "Why does he exist"?

Simple.. We exist. Ergo someone or something created us.. Call it "God"...

Hi madasafish

I take it your tongue is firmly in your cheek