Does Exposure To Violent Images Cause Violence In Society?

[Inishfree]

Like respecting their stance on equal rights for all, and bringing known pedophiles to justice ?

I'm sure individual catholics by in large share that belief. The shocking cover up was not done by normal worshippers.

So ?

They still give money to the church and the church STILL hasn't come clean.

The flock (and there's good reasons for calling them a flock) are indirectly complicit if they continue to support them until they do

I'm not comfortable with putting down anyone's faith.  My husband is catholic and the small parish we attend.  Almost all donations go directly to that parish.  His parish has never had any priest who was or is a child molester.  Same for my childhood, United Methodist Church.  If we dig deep enough, we can find a horrible history for almost every religion including Judaism and Islam.  It certainly doesn't mean that the present day followers are violent people.  Most in fact, are just the opposite. 

[briscoetheque]

Their 'faith' is not in question Inish.

Their support, financially and with their feet in supporting a human created and human run corrupt organisation is the issue.

Faith in the god we're talking about here should make such support abhorrent. But it doesn't.

That's quite confusing.

Everyone on earth is a hypocrite, no question. There are just some human created groups that live their life by hypocrisy a little moreso than others, whilst preaching the opposite.

[mdmomof7]

And, thus, we've corrupted the gift Jesus gave us. Good thing He came. We humans corrupt it all.

[briscoetheque]

And, thus, we've corrupted the gift Jesus gave us. Good thing He came. We humans corrupt it all.

Yet once again, there's the conundrum. Thank god for the good things and only blame ourselves for the bad.

Does the incredible human brain a fairly decent disservice for mine...

[Inishfree]

Their 'faith' is not in question Inish.

Their support, financially and with their feet in supporting a human created and human run corrupt organisation is the issue.

Faith in the god we're talking about here should make such support abhorrent. But it doesn't.

That's quite confusing.

Everyone on earth is a hypocrite, no question. There are just some human created groups that live their life by hypocrisy a little moreso than others, whilst preaching the opposite.

Thanks Brisco for your reply.  I understand what you are saying. 

[briscoetheque]

Cool. I just read it back and I have absolutely no idea what I'm saying 

[KitCat]

I don't care if people wish to believe in gods, fairies, spaghetti monsters, cheese toasties with the face of mystical Virgins on them or whatever else, that's entirely up to you. But what you absolutely must not do is force your belief onto others.

To suggest that all of societies ills would be cured if we all had religion is preposterous. If antibiotics had the failure rate that religion does at stopping its followers from committing evil acts, then Howard Florey and Alexander Flemming would have lost their credibility and careers.

Furthermore, grandiose claims that Atheists and Agnostics have no moral code is unsupportable and just plain bigoted. Could anyone possibly defend a statement such as "the problem with America is that there are too many Jews, they have no moral code and should adopt Christianity"?

The whole idea that religion works, except when it doesn't, is a logical tautology (not to be confused with a rhetorical tautology), if you can't handle your beliefs and statements being challenged, then perhaps they should be kept to yourself.

[DGordon1]

I don't think it's fair to hold normal worshippers to account for what people at the top have done. I wouldn't blame normal taxpayers for corruption carried out by their leaders for instance. Or blaming branch staff at Barclays bank because their directors fixed the Libor rate. It's unrealistic to expect someone to drop their faith entirely because of what some corrupt people have done higher up the chain. Those sins are not what the church is supposed to be about, therefore their followers will continue to believe in the core values of their religion.

And no it's not fair for anyone to force their beliefs on others, and that included atheists. They often seem to think they have carte blanche to bash any religion because they're not affiliated to one. I say that as a cynical agnostic/atheist myself.

[Inishfree]

I don't care if people wish to believe in gods, fairies, spaghetti monsters, cheese toasties with the face of mystical Virgins on them or whatever else, that's entirely up to you. But what you absolutely must not do is force your belief onto others.

To suggest that all of societies ills would be cured if we all had religion is preposterous. If antibiotics had the failure rate that religion does at stopping its followers from committing evil acts, then Howard Florey and Alexander Flemming would have lost their credibility and careers.

Furthermore, grandiose claims that Atheists and Agnostics have no moral code is unsupportable and just plain bigoted. Could anyone possibly defend a statement such as "the problem with America is that there are too many Jews, they have no moral code and should adopt Christianity"?

The whole idea that religion works, except when it doesn't, is a logical tautology (not to be confused with a rhetorical tautology), if you can't handle your beliefs and statements being challenged, then perhaps they should be kept to yourself.

I agree and would never push my faith on others.  I think you make a good point. 

[Inishfree]

I don't think it's fair to hold normal worshippers to account for what people at the top have done. I wouldn't blame normal taxpayers for corruption carried out by their leaders for instance. Or blaming branch staff at Barclays bank because their directors fixed the Libor rate. It's unrealistic to expect someone to drop their faith entirely because of what some corrupt people have done higher up the chain. Those sins are not what the church is supposed to be about, therefore their followers will continue to believe in the core values of their religion.

And no it's not fair for anyone to force their beliefs on others, and that included atheists. They often seem to think they have carte blanche to bash any religion because they're not affiliated to one. I say that as a cynical agnostic/atheist myself.

You also make a good point.  Folks who choose to go to a church, temple, mosque, etc.  Are doing so because they want to.  They aren't responsible for what the powers that be, do.

[Tumbling Dice]

I think people who take drugs are deluded but many drug takers think they see the truth clearly when they’re off their heads and that sober people are going through life deluded.  Some might think that people who put their faith in religion are deluded and off their heads on a drug.  I think people whose sense of security lies in money and material things are deluded, but try telling that to someone who’s skint.

Many religious faiths offer people something in life which science and reason can’t and that is eternal life.  Surely one of the biggest insecurities of life for people is the insecurity of losing their life.  The idea that this is all there is or all there is ever going to be is something a lot of people can’t accept.  That is why religious belief is so important to so many.  We also live in a world where justice isn’t always done in this life but religious faith often offers people justice beyond this world.  Secularists can’t offer these people any solace.  Psychologically many people have an enormous need to believe in something bigger than earthly life whether it’s verifiable by reason or not.

And there has been far more misery and suffering inflicted throughout human history because of human nature itself, than solely because religion.  In fact, our need for religious belief is a central tenet of our humanity.  And yet do we all feel self-hatred because of our humanity? 

[briscoetheque]

How's about those violent images?

[striker]

I think some of the venom directed towards religion by some atheists is rooted in fear.  That can be the only reason why some non-religious people seem to relish ridiculing religious beliefs, their believers and institutions.  They’re particularly suspicious when religious people try to influence public policy based on their concept of morality.  But Atheist’s don’t mind imposing their secular values upon religious folk in terms of public policy which many religious people might find immoral at times.  In an open and democratic society, where there are many followers of different religions, I think it’s important to be respectful of religious people and their beliefs, which are for the most part earnestly held.  They’re certainly as entitled as any other groups in society to play an active part in the political process and to seek to influence the public policy that governs us all.  At the same time, it’s important that religious folks are tolerant of others who don’t share their beliefs or lifestyle, whether they hold other religious faiths or don’t have any religious faith, and accept that in an open society people enjoy freedom of expression.  Religious believers and atheists aren’t going anywhere, so they might as well start co-existing.   

Religious freedoms in an open and democratic society ultimately have to be checked by secular authority, which acts as a kind of mediator of oftentimes conflicting moral beliefs.  Secular authority has the power to determine which freedoms should be granted and which should be proscribed.  If religious people cannot accept that then they should live in a state whose laws reflect their own more.  Secular people are perfectly entitled to criticise religious organisations which fall short of societal standards and any religious organisation that does should be held to account by the law of the land.  One would expect that religious followers, being moral people, would also hold their leaders to account for any immoral and/or illegal transgressions, and it’s easy to understand why secularists may feel frustration at some followers’ reluctance to do so, or their lack of vigour in doing so.  But we shouldn’t conflate followers of a particular religion with their religion’s leaders or their religion’s bureaucracy.  Ultimately, I and the majority of citizens of western societies don’t want to live in a theocracy, which would be problematic anyway since there are many different religions where each would have their own idea of what laws should exist in a theocracy. 

I disagree. The fear isn't on our part. The issue is, when looking at religion, we see a system that is clearly broken. Let's look at Christianity for example--it's constantly changing its rules to fit comfortably in current society, and therefore it's not "all-knowing" as it claims. You either believe everything that book tells you, or you aren't following the religion correctly. This isn't about ridiculing someone because they feel insecure about death or need something to look up to, it's about looking at a system that was written when we knew absolutely nothing about the world, and were basically savages.

As far as it playing a role in our government and how we should take into account everyone's beliefs, I think it's pretty clear where that has stood at.

[Tumbling Dice]

Oh I think reason governs your govenment's affairs, within reason.

[JTBaby]

I don't think it's fair to hold normal worshippers to account for what people at the top have done. I wouldn't blame normal taxpayers for corruption carried out by their leaders for instance. Or blaming branch staff at Barclays bank because their directors fixed the Libor rate. It's unrealistic to expect someone to drop their faith entirely because of what some corrupt people have done higher up the chain. Those sins are not what the church is supposed to be about, therefore their followers will continue to believe in the core values of their religion.

And no it's not fair for anyone to force their beliefs on others, and that included atheists. They often seem to think they have carte blanche to bash any religion because they're not affiliated to one. I say that as a cynical agnostic/atheist myself.

I don't have the option of not paying taxes.

I do have the option of taking my business elsewhere.

BIG difference.