Topic: When will Religions die? - page 22. (Read 20308 times)

I would also point out that non-religious people are also charitable, help the poor and homeless, etc... it's not like only religious people help the needy

On the other hand, religious "charities" require you to attend their church services in third world countries or you won't get to eat their food... that's not charity, it's preaching to hostages... non-religious charities like Doctors Without Borders or Heifer International help anyone who needs help

Religious charities are another matter altogether... NONE of them are charitable... they are all for-profit under the guise of charity (like the Salvation Army or Deseret Industries... fuck the salvation army, go to GoodWill, where you wont get ripped off by some religious fucks)

Non-religious charities are forced to spend at least 10% of their capital each year DOING CHARITY, or lose their 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status

For religious charities, spreading their religion is somehow considered "charity" for tax purposes, so they don't actually have to spend ANY money helping ANYONE but themselves (and most don't)

But people did lot more damage using religion than those that done good. And I am sure religion won't last long. Next 1 or 2 centuries, after that it will became only history, or something like tradition.

Religion will be lost if no one believes and runs it. Every religion has a different understanding but one goal is heaven, but the way to heaven every human must choose his choice. Not a religion that creates problems, but different understandings that trigger problems.

I do not think so. Religion that dies does not affect our lives. Some are religious and others are not religious. And there are people who use religion to propagandize, anti-terrorism, political assassination psychological panic in the masses. Crazy!

Surprised that people who label themselves agnostic have lower birth rate than those who identify as atheists. You need to have at least a birth rate of 2 for the population to be self-sustaining (assuming that all of the children live long enough to reproduce).

Maybe there should be a minimum and maximum number of children per household (polygamous families count as one household). There would be benefits for the first few children, and then when the "maximum" is exceeded, each children over that would incur penalties. For example if min is 3 and max is 5, then the first 3 would have tax exemptions, and maybe allowance from the government. 4th and 5th would have no benefits whatsover and when a 6th come along, that would incur penalties for the parents, like having to pay for that extra child monthly.

I know there are countries giving incentives to their citizens to have children but that seem t be not working. 

There will always be some sort of religion, school of belief or whatever you may call it. Hell, even in crypto you find semi-religious disputes. The individual may not need beliefs, but as a society it's what keeps them together - or drives them apart, unfortunately. We're hardwired like that, I'm afraid.

I think you are right, because i share similar thoughts. We all believe in something, either that be a God or something else like science, we all believe in something. And base of Faith is belief. Therefor there is faith in all of us, it is just a personal opinion either we admit that and say it out loud, or we chose to deny it and say otherwise. But we all believe in something.

Very good, it is indeed from SRIE, you are well read.

Quality over quantity argument is quite relative. If your legacy doesnt survive you it is still quality? And what, if your offspring will be increasingly small minority in a world, that they will not understand?

80% of all children share value systems of their parents into the adulthood (those numbers are for the West, elsewhere it is much higher). They you count in the fact, that secularists dont have enough children to atleast sustain their own population and that nothing prevents atheist from converting later in his/her life.

Numbers game. Current secular system doesnt have better perspective, than did those of Greco-Romans two millenia ago.

To speak on this subject objectively, then you must first answer yourself, whether that does not give for each person and in particular for you. If a person is positive about religion, then this is a very good indicator. My opinion is on the other side right Because a person can not live without faith.

I believe this was from Shall the Religious Inherit the Earth... You said it yourself, it's mostly demographic. Had secularist been spewing out babies like screaming gumballs then things would have been different. But that's not the case. They seem to be fine with a small number of children. Maybe they were going for quality over quantity?    

Also seems it were the religious that are against family planning, or at least contraceptives.

I'd make a guess why atheists might prefer less children - they don't believe there'll be any deity out there to help their offspring. Thinking of this, they choose to have less children who they can give the best they possibly can.

Religion will not die, because there are many people who will support this current for the management of other people. Now it has become a business.

You think, huh?

This may come as a shock to secular sensibilities. Religious fundamentalism is set to bury the ghost of secularism. Secular liberalism is collapsing under the weight of its own contradictions and the fundamentalists are about to take over the world. This is, says Eric Kaufmann, who teaches politics at University of London, not necessarily a bad thing. It may make us more secure, more grounded in our identities and communities, and much happier.

The main weapon in the fundamentalist armoury is demography. The world is going through an unparalleled shift from population growth to decline. The trend is led by Europe, where the numbers of people being born are hardly replacing those dying. India, South-east Asia and Latin America are also following the same path. Prosperity, urbanisation, birth control and female education have all contributed to the overall rate of decline in population.

The Mormons should have been a shrinking minority in Utah. But despite considerable non-Mormon immigration, they increased their share of the population from 60 per cent in 1920 to 75 per cent in 2000. The Quiverfull Protestants, who see children as a blessing, have formulated a "two hundred year plan" for demographic domination. And they are right on course.

Nevertheless, there is considerable food for thought here. The secular abuse of religion has reached the point of diminishing returns. The religious, refusing to be meek, are fighting back and will probably inherit the earth. Though not all of them would be fundamentalists. Despite certain demographic trends, they are unlikely to outnumber the moderates, except perhaps in Israel and the US. But Kaufmann is surely right to suggest that it's time we stopped fearing and demonising the puritans.

Religion will die when parents stop imposing their religion on children. Now there are many young people who do not believe in all sorts of religions so I think it will be very soon.

Religion will not die, there are still so many religious people in this world, people who are not religious are very few when compared with religion. Religion dies only on the Day of Judgment, when the Day of Resurrection, there is no longer a religious person.

Precisely, thank you.

As G. K. Chesterton wrote, when men cease to believe in God, they do not then believe in nothing, they believe in anything.

For they lack what Christianity gave man — a cause not only to live for, and die for, but a moral code to live by, with the promise that, at the end a life so lived, would come eternal life. Islam, too, holds out that promise.

A lot can be said about religion about believing people, but I would prefer one single thing, When I say that a person without Faith is just a stupid animal. It seems to me that everyone should believe in emptiness. I'm not saying specifically God it can be or something else, but there must be faith..

Yep that is the way how church kept power true ages, and even today there are people who uses their position in the same way. I believe that religion was founded from best of intentions to help people and all, but as always there was some people who have seen the way that religion could be exploited and used for their use and gain. It will be always like that, but do not forget that we like in a world of free will. One person is stronger than we believe.

Never my friend, if you want that you better consider moving to other planet.
I'm sorry, but this is the world we're living on.

I couldn't agree more, yes in history it somewhat reveals some secrets behind these religions, it was also mentioned that the crown and church are the twin pillars of the kingdom. Meaning, the Church took advantage of this and manipulate these political people and took over the whole nation that if you don't agree with this you will be a sinner and so on.

Then such understanding becomes part of their religion.