The best description I ever heard for religion was fairytales for adults.
But don't fairytales usually have happy endings?
The best description I ever heard for religion was fairytales for adults.
Funny thing is, if it is a crock, you will never know. It’s only if it isn’t, that you will.
yep… which implies the ‘leaders’ aren’t weak. You need something about you to control others behaviour.
It’s How to extract influence, money and power from as many people as they can.
Religion is essentially just another term for a profit making business , wrapped up in a facade of mythology & symbolism, with self serving interests at the top, and with their workers doing their bidding and ensuring the business grows, lobbys, profits and attacks their rivals.
I’m not sure getting eaten by a wolf is a particularly happy ending ;)But don't fairytales usually have happy endings?
I’m not sure getting eaten by a wolf is a particularly happy ending ;)
That pretty much nails it. I'd never criticise anyone for choosing to believe in whatever deity they want to. That's their right, however misguided that may seem to others. Just as long as they don't try to impose their beliefs on me.The best description I ever heard for religion was fairytales for adults.
re: 1. nope, you are just making up stuff. Perhaps youre on the PL panel...You're dodging the two main thrusts of the conversation though.
1. Your view implies almost all religious people are stupid, naive, or gullible. There's also a shared implication that people who aren't religious are the opposite and therefore superior intellectually.
2. Your view doesn't fit with the reality of the world and is instead a tiny microcosm of a highly cynical view.
And we can add the third now
3. Your view implies that religious leaders are sociopathic control freaks and liars.
The interesting thing when you talk about religion is that the conversations usually tell you more about the other person. When people don't understand something, the default reaction in the modern information age is to presume either moral or intellectual failings instead of presuming the competence of other people and actually attempting to understand the whats and whys. Somehow they feel this is more enlightened and intelligent. It's a weird form of arrogance when you think about it. "This doesn't check out with me so the only possible solution is that they are failed in some way, because if this point had merit then I would also find it compelling and I don't."