Results 1 to 10 of 70

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Senior Member Hutch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    305
    Thanked: 32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hoglahoo View Post
    What are you getting at? That statement seems to be randomly tossed into your post. I'm not even sure what it means
    It's not random, if you go back and read the defenders of religion, they defend all religion as a whole. This is done by intoning that religious people are some how more moral and ethical than non-religious people. I have not noticed that secularist or atheists, saying that all secularists or atheists are better.

    In fact secularists and atheists are grouped together not by their beliefs but by what they don't believe. Where religious followers are grouped together by a common belief, that belief is in a common supernatural creator and a religious dogma that has answers to all life's question.
    Last edited by Hutch; 10-16-2008 at 11:07 PM.

  2. #2
    Never a dull moment hoglahoo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Tulsa, OK
    Posts
    8,922
    Thanked: 1501
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hutch View Post
    religious followers are grouped together by a common belief, that belief is in a common supernatural creator and a religious dogma that has answers to all life's question.
    Are you sure?
    Find me on SRP's official chat in ##srp on Freenode. Link is at top of SRP's homepage

  3. #3
    < Banned User >
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    3,763
    Thanked: 735

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hutch View Post
    It's not random, if you go back and read the defenders of religion, they defend all religion as a whole. This is done by intoning that religious people are some how more moral and ethical than non-religious people. I have not noticed that secularist or atheists, saying that all secularists or atheists are better.

    In fact secularists and atheists are grouped together by not their beliefs but by what they don't believe. Where religious followers are grouped together by a common belief, that belief is in a common supernatural creator and a religious dogma that has answers to all life's question.
    Isn't that the whole point of the film? A smug sense of intellectual superiority to the irrational beliefs of religious adherents?

  4. #4
    Senior Member Hutch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    305
    Thanked: 32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Seraphim View Post
    Isn't that the whole point of the film? A smug sense of intellectual superiority to the irrational beliefs of religious adherents?
    Have you seen it?

    I would say it's a exploration of religion and the blind following of a man made dogma.

    If you want to term it as a smug sense of intelligent superiority so be, as apposed to the fear induced religious following that condemns fellow mammals that happen to believe in a different form of worship or non belief into an eternity to torment and torture. You tell me which group professes superiority.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,292
    Thanked: 150

    Default

    Has anyone else seen this?

    Bill does come off as a little self righteous, but he's a comedian and his tone of voice hasn't changed in years, this movie is no different from his stand-up shows.

    The main things that I got from the movie are:

    1) Every person who considers himmself religious knows what his holy book "really" means, despite what generations of theologians, church officials, and other citizen's have interpreted the books to mean.

    2) There is never an account in a holy book that actually calls for violence, those parts are metaphorical, despite what the words say.

    3) Amazingly (or not), a person's interpretation of religion is an extension of what they would do if they were God.

    4) Our country is far too willing to let religious individuals exercise their religious beliefs within a political office.

    And his conclusion, as I understood it, isn't nearly as inflamatory as it has been made out to be, read between the lines about what we need to do and I think everyone can find common ground.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •