Jump to content
-Jaro-

Terror attack in Sri Lanka - churches and hotels targeted

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-48001720

https://www.news18.com/news/world/sri-lanka-terror-attack-live-six-blasts-at-churches-hotels-rock-easter-sunday-24-killed-2110779.html

 

Another tragedy in human history... 

And this one is really troubling, since it was few coordinated attacks on different sites...

Probably victims from all over the world since targets were Christian churches while celebrating  biggest Christian feast and 5 star hotels...

Number of victims is constantly rising...

Trully sad day...

Edited by -Jaro-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, lukepowell1988 said:

And this is why i'm not a fan of any religion 

And this is why you will never understand why these things happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Gracii Guns said:

@SoulMonster @lukepowell1988

Are you both saying that if we were all atheists, humans would stop killing each other? 

I'm of the persuasion that if someone is going to kill another, outside of a military/secret agent context, they have to be rather messed up, and might do it anyway if they had a reason. 

The vast majority of what appears to be one religion attacking another, is in fact politically motivated. Just dressed up as a religious thing as an intellectually lazy way to justify selfish motives. 

May the victims of today's tragedy rest in peace.

All I will say there is when did the last Atheist blow themselves up in the name of Science ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

No kill has anything with religion...

No religion spreads violence...

People use religion as mask for their goals. If there was no religion, it would be something else...

Please spread atheist fanatism in other topic ...

Edited by -Jaro-
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

People will always find a way to kill each other, but without religion there would have been less bloodshed in the history of mankind.

Happy Easter.

Edited by EvanG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, lukepowell1988 said:

All I will say there is when did the last Atheist blow themselves up in the name of Science ?

Straw man. Science is a method of inquiry, not a belief system. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, -Jaro- said:

No kill has anything with religion...

No religion spreads violence...

People use religion as mask for their goals. If there was no religion, it would be something else...

Please spread atheist fanatism in other topic ...

Seems you are kind of delusional my friend.

No kill has anything with religion... this attack, 9/11 and most attacks in the middle east world are 100% religious in nature

No religion spreads violence... evidently you've never read the Quran or the Bible where God says there is a time to kill.

People use religion as mask for their goals... I doubt they hide there deeds when suicide bombings are a typical Jihadist MO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The State Communists of the 20th Century were obviously killing 10s of millions in the name of religion.... and the troubles in Sri Lanka aren't a direct result of western colonialism... good talk ahistorical, incurious edge lords :lol:

To the victims, may you rest in the peace of Christ

Blessed Easter!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sad because it's Easter Sunday.

I really wish people would be more sensitive to other people's religions and even if you don't agree, let it be.

I don't care who or what you believe in, everyone has the right to their beliefs. I don't understand why it's so hard for some to respect and move on.

If they think they will be rewarded after death for doing these horrible deeds, they won't be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Gracii Guns said:

Straw man. Science is a method of inquiry, not a belief system. 

No, that's not a straw man. Science not being a belief system is a moot point and if anything just reinforces what Luke said. Anyway, I'm resisting the urge to dive into a full-on debate in this thread which is hard. 

Horrific attack obviously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Gracii Guns said:

@SoulMonster @lukepowell1988

Are you both saying that if we were all atheists, humans would stop killing each other? 

No, I didn't say that at all. But if we were all atheists we would have one less reason to kill each other. This attack was obviously religiously motivated. 

  • GNFNR 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SoulMonster said:

No, I didn't say that at all. But if we were all atheists we would have one less reason to kill each other. This attack was obviously religiously motivated. 

The problem with that idea is that you can go right on down the line eliminating ideas with a view to giving people ‘one less reason’.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

The problem with that idea is that you can go right on down the line eliminating ideas with a view to giving people ‘one less reason’.  

No one has been arguing in favor of eliminating any ideas. 

  • GNFNR 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But yeah, it would undoubtedly be great if we could rid ourselves from any ideas that has a negative net effect on humanity. Whether that is the idea that "people who follow other gods must die" or the whole irrational belief in gods, can be argued to the moon and back and is really not suited for this thread. 

Some will always protect religions by pointing out that when religious extremists do awful things, it isn't the religions' fault but anything else. But people don't perform coordinated suicide attacks on a churches in Easter if it wasn't for religious motivation. Sure, the perpetrators could have been psychopaths acting in a group picking christians on their holiest days for other reasons - because everything is possible! - but from what I have read about similar attacks the suicide bombers were likely normal people who went through a radicalization process where they ended up believing that they did the will of their particular god.

One cannot possible explain this atrocity without pointing out the religious motivation. That doesn't mean the killers wouldn't have done bad things if it weren't for their insane beliefs, but we can be sure they wouldn't have done what they did (more than 200 dead and counting) and I would bet they would likely never have ended up as mass murderers. 

  • Like 2
  • GNFNR 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

No one has been arguing in favor of eliminating any ideas. 

Quote

But yeah, it would undoubtedly be great if we could rid ourselves from any ideas that has a negative net effect on humanity.

I must be a fuckin' mind reader eh?  And how would we quantify this negative net effect?  Who would get the deciding vote?  Men of reason I shouldn't wonder.

Quote

Whether that is the idea that "people who follow other gods must die" or the whole irrational belief in gods, can be argued to the moon and back and is really not suited for this thread. 

You can argue it to the moon and back, yes and it'll end on the same spot and I'll have the same position on it.  Fuck anyone trying to tell anybody else what they can't or can't believe and whether or not their beliefs are worthy of existing on this earth, that goes for religious people or people who follow science or reason or whatever.  The second you believe that your ideas or beliefs are more important than other peoples lives then your ideas and beliefs are bullshit...and there are religious people as well as atheists and men of science who have felt that about their ideas throughout human history.

Quote

Some will always protect religions by pointing out that when religious extremists do awful things, it isn't the religions' fault but anything else. But people don't perform coordinated suicide attacks on a churches in Easter if it wasn't for religious motivation.

Why narrow the parameters to suicide attacks on churches in Easter?  I mean thats pretty fuckin' specific but it boils down to mass murder right?  Do we really want to go down  this path, me pointing out instances of ideologically led mass murder in the name of something other that religion, its really quite tedious an exercise, you have a rough idea of what my response is going to be and I have a rough idea of yours, how about we just cut to the chase, why religion?  Why not any number of other ideologies in the name of which awful shit is carried out?  There are literally billions of people of faith in the world and among them a miniscule minority are terrorists, psychos and murderers...so the proposal is those billions should be tarred with the same brush as the few psychos and we should sit on our high horses telling people what is or isn't OK to believe based on our own made up rulebook in the same way extremists do?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
35 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

I must be a fuckin' mind reader eh?  And how would we quantify this negative net effect?  Who would get the deciding vote?  Men of reason I shouldn't wonder.

You can argue it to the moon and back, yes and it'll end on the same spot and I'll have the same position on it.  Fuck anyone trying to tell anybody else what they can't or can't believe and whether or not their beliefs are worthy of existing on this earth, that goes for religious people or people who follow science or reason or whatever.  The second you believe that your ideas or beliefs are more important than other peoples lives then your ideas and beliefs are bullshit...and there are religious people as well as atheists and men of science who have felt that about their ideas throughout human history.

Why narrow the parameters to suicide attacks on churches in Easter?  I mean thats pretty fuckin' specific but it boils down to mass murder right?  Do we really want to go down  this path, me pointing out instances of ideologically led mass murder in the name of something other that religion, its really quite tedious an exercise, you have a rough idea of what my response is going to be and I have a rough idea of yours, how about we just cut to the chase, why religion?  Why not any number of other ideologies in the name of which awful shit is carried out?  There are literally billions of people of faith in the world and among them a miniscule minority are terrorists, psychos and murderers...so the proposal is those billions should be tarred with the same brush as the few psychos and we should sit on our high horses telling people what is or isn't OK to believe based on our own made up rulebook in the same way extremists do?

Chronology. Up to the point when it was written no one in this thread had argued for the elimination of any ideas, really. 

And still at this point has no one said we should prohibit any ideas. Arguing that it would be great if people didn't believe in nonsense is very far from arguing for the elimination of said nonsense. The latter smacks of some kind of censorship on thinking, something I would never condone. And I am sure you know that. People are, and should always be, free to think and believe anything. But that doesn't mean that I should think that every belief is equally valuable or not think we would be better off without certain beliefs. 

Why are you arguing as if I am only against religion? As I explicitly stated, I am against any ideas that are undoubtedly bad for us. Belief in supernatural gods is just one of them. I am also against the idea that owning guns is a sensible thing. And just like religion, guns can make people do things they shouldn't (although guns don't come with a manual belittling other people or telling you that you are the chosen one and that the rest are infidels). But right now, in this thread, we are discussing religion and how this particular idea is a curse on humanity. 

And no, I have never said that all theists are bad, or that they are all anything like the Sri Lankan terrorists, nor that they could ever let their irrational beliefs lead them down that awful path and end up as mass murderers. Similarly, I can be against guns even if most gun owners will never shoot someone. Bad apples and all that. But you see, I am not against religion simply because of all the atrocities done in the names of various gods, all the religiously motivated wars and atrocities, they are just one of the many negative aspects that makes me conclude that we would be much better off without this arcane rubbish. So it goes deeper than just wishing a belief away because how it can lead a few to do gruesome things. 

And, oh yeah, terrorists don't just go round "telling people what is or isn't ok to believe" :lol:. If they limited themselves to argumentation and polemics they really wouldn't be terrorists, would they? They go round killing people for having diverging thoughts and I am sure you see the difference. 

Edited by SoulMonster
  • GNFNR 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Y’know, I’ve somehow lost the will to argue :lol:  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

I don't think anyone is arguing that because religion can lead to murders, like the atrocity in Sri Lanka, we should be opposed to religion. Such argumentation just results in counter-arguments like, "but cars kill more people so cars should be banned, too!" It always comes down to something's overall net effect. You cannot just cherry-pick one negative aspect and forget about the positives. On the whole, are we benefitting from this thing or are we worse off with it? What is its net effect on humanity? Len challenged me on how we can quantify such things, like how can I claim that religion's net effect on humanity is negative? And is it arrogant to even attempt such a discussion?

The effect of theism is undeniably impossible to quantify because many of the various factors are intangible or just very hard to put a value on. I.e., how can you put a value on the feeling of comfort a believer in gods may feel, or, in the case of cars, the value of being able to drive to meet your parents, or, in the case of guns, the joy one gets from having shooting as a hobby? Likewise, how can you put a value on the 290 people (and counting) who were killed in Sri Lanka yesterday? What is the value of a human life? Or the thousands killed by cars? Or all those killed by guns every year? How much joy outweighs the life of a kid? Intangible. Impossible. Yet most of us are able to arrive at some decision on this. We either approve of cars, or we don't; we want to restrict gun access, or we don't; and we think religions benefit humanity, or we don't. Politicians even has it as their livelihood. 

Personally, when looking at the effect of religion it is my firm conviction that we would be better off without it. The negatives out-weigh the positives. Not because I have quantified these things, not that I could, but because it strikes me as obvious. The polarization that comes from religious belief ("thou shall not have other gods"), the inherent aggression in some variants of theisms towards followers of other gods or non-believers which has lead to millions of deaths through the ages, its barrier to social progress or change (like opposition to homosexuality and equality between the sexes), its frequently inherent opposition to science (like in the evolution debate), and anything else that contradicts its theology and doctrine, the message that it is okay to believe in things for which there is no evidence (a dangerous precedent), its use in social control (when threat of divine displeasure is used to enforce rules), dread from inhumane and/or pointless concepts and rules (like original sin and hell), etc, are in sum larger than the comfort, security and feeling of belonging that comes from believing in gods or being part of a religious community. These last positive aspects can also to a large extent be replaced by secular organizations and structures. You get much of the same from being a part of, say, a secular, humanist organization. The only think I can think of that is a positive with religion and cannot really be replaced by any non-religious thingy, is the belief in an afterlife which can greatly heal sorrow and pain when confronted with death. So I think we would be better off without religion. In fact, I think we would be much, much, much better off without it. I think freeing us from the shackles of irrational belief could result in a new intellectual Renaissance. 

Granted, losing one's religion can be a harrowing experience and I don't really wish that upon anyone who has grown accustomed to it and enjoys its rewards. And that's the huge dilemma here. How can we go from a superstitious world where a majority of humans believe in gods to a rational world where we don't, with the least hurt on people? How can we make this transition as smooth as possible? I think the only solution is to do it slowly. Instead of trying to take belief away from believers it is better to try to prevent theism from being transferred form generation to generation. Encourage parents to not unthinkingly transfer their irrational beliefs to their kids (but let them make their own decision when older and capable of rational thought), and strengthen rationality in school so kids know that religions hold no answers to meaningful questions. Fight poverty, inequality, and social injustice -- because all of these tend to be correlated with higher religiosity. And build societies with secular alternatives to religion. In fact, we probably don't need to do anything else but keep fighting poverty and injustice and people will abandon religion by themselves.

Schools should remain/become a safe place for all children, regardless or their faith and traditions. Schools should never become a hub for proselytizing secular fundamentalist ideology, for reasons obvious to rational people.

In the rest of your post, railing to end theism, is largely a cathartic exercise of youthful idealism 'we'll change billions of peoples world view and build new institutions and world peace!'. It totally misses the core causes of division which are wealth, class, location, race, xenophobia, bigotry, fundamentalism, economics, historical events, elite secular power structures like the World Bank, etc. To address the actual challenges facing humanity empathy and solidarity are our tools. Your wishy washy plan for humanity not only misses the point, but plays into divisions that benefit the actual threats to humanity.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just don't know what to say anymore except so sad to hear about this.

I don't think these terrorists will ever stop attacking innocent people.

Even if the US and their allies get out of Muslim countries, I doubt these attacks would stop. Some of these people know nothing but fighting and attacking innocent people, so what would they do? You know they would continue to terrorize innocent people. It's what they do.

It happens all over the world. Gangs and cartels use innocent people for their business and if you don't agree you're dead. Why do you think so many migrants are leaving their own countries to travel thousands of miles? Some of them don't have a choice. I just wish there was a better way to help them all out.

  • GNFNR 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 No more religion versus atheism discussion. This is about Sri Lanka so please use the other thread for your discussions. Thank you.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×