Originally posted by KellyJay
No debate there you take away all guns they will stop killing with guns, but will continue to kill with bombs, knives, rocks, hand to hand, bath tubs, you name it people will use it if they can. Religion is a tool for some people, as cars are a tool, knifes are a tool, what that person with the tool does will make it used for good or evil. It is the heart o ...[text shortened]... using it were first said by other people, I don’t recall their names to give them credit.
Kelly

But a person is less likely to kill someone in the heat of the moment with their bare hands than with a gun.

Likewise, religion, over the years has been shown to be very effective at manipulating people to kill the other side, because they are not of the same religion, or sometimes even just the same denomination.

Originally posted by scottishinnz
But a person is less likely to kill someone in the heat of the moment with their bare hands than with a gun.

Likewise, religion, over the years has been shown to be very effective at manipulating people to kill the other side, because they are not of the same religion, or sometimes even just the same denomination.

I agree with your point, but the bottom line is that we must keep guns out of people's hands who would kill, it isn't like guns just jump off the shelf and shoot others on their own. Religion is no different, people will use it or something else to promote themselves, the trouble is with the people, we do evil things to one another. To bad mouth guns or religion is to take way from who is using those tools to do evil, and that is people!
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
I agree with your point, but the bottom line is that we must keep guns out of people's hands who would kill, it isn't like guns just jump off the shelf and shoot others on their own. Religion is no different, people will use it or something else to promote themselves, the trouble is with the people, we do evil things to one another. To bad mouth guns or religion is to take way from who is using those tools to do evil, and that is people!
Kelly

Agreed entirely, but there are many things, like nuclear weapons, that we keep out of peoples hands as a matter of course, even though it would still come back to people doing bad things to other people.

Originally posted by scottishinnz
Agreed entirely, but there are many things, like nuclear weapons, that we keep out of peoples hands as a matter of course, even though it would still come back to people doing bad things to other people.

No argument there either, I'm sorry anyone has nuclear weapons.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
No argument there either, I'm sorry anyone has nuclear weapons.
Kelly

So I guess it comes down to where we set the bar, rather than a black and white, right and wrong, case. Personally, I can see no positive role for guns in society, hence I would have them banned, were I king for a day.

Religion, now that's a more difficult one. Many wars and such like have been fought around and over religion. However, religion also provides relief (or self-delusion) to many people who, for whatever reason, are having trouble dealing with the reality of situations. For example, the death of a loved one is probably the most common scenario. So, perhaps I am not against religion per se, but I am against religions that have the "don't think for yourself" doctorine.

Originally posted by ivanhoe
I'm part of a religious community, the Roman-Catholic community, which encourages people to educate oneself and to research things.

The Encyclical "Faith and Reason":

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_15101998_fides-et-ratio_en.html

Please, study it .... I highly recommend it ..... especially to the ignorant, both religious ànd secular ! 🙂

Strangely enough I was remarking to a friend this very evening about your study of the vast catholic scholastic tradition. We concluded that it is quite possible that the RCC has a counter-book for every secular paper ever published.

Alas, I have neither the time, nor the inclination to fit RCC dogma into an already tardy study schedule.

Originally posted by Starrman
Strangely enough I was remarking to a friend this very evening about your study of the vast catholic scholastic tradition. We concluded that it is quite possible that the RCC has a counter-book for every secular paper ever published.

Alas, I have neither the time, nor the inclination to fit RCC dogma into an already tardy study schedule.

Here is one tidbit:
5. On her part, the Church cannot but set great value upon reason's drive to attain goals which render people's lives ever more worthy. She sees in philosophy the way to come to know fundamental truths about human life. At the same time, the Church considers philosophy an indispensable help for a deeper understanding of faith and for communicating the truth of the Gospel to those who do not yet know it.

No bias there, eh.

Originally posted by KellyJay
No argument there either, I'm sorry anyone has nuclear weapons.
Kelly

Some people including, I believe, some leaders of communist states, have claimed that keeping religion out of the hands of the common man is a good thing. One suspects that in the case of communists it is a case of self preservation rather than 'the good of the people' just as they would like to keep information out of the peoples hands (no press freedom).
However there is still nothing wrong with discussing the downsides and benefits to owning a gun (or nuclear weapon) or the downsides and benefits to religion.
This thread was not intended to show that religion is entirely harmful or evil but rather to ask what the worst effects are.
As another example, a drug user appears to derive some benefits (apparent temporary happiness), but also suffers some side effects. We can discuss those side effects and the reasons why we should not do drugs. Whereas you are implying that we should not discuss drugs at all as it is all the fault of the drug user.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Some people including, I believe, some leaders of communist states, have claimed that keeping religion out of the hands of the common man is a good thing. One suspects that in the case of communists it is a case of self preservation rather than 'the good of the people' just as they would like to keep information out of the peoples hands (no press freedom) ...[text shortened]... are implying that we should not discuss drugs at all as it is all the fault of the drug user.

Okay, I can see your point now; I did not before, my bad, sorry! The thing about this board more times than not, how I read and understood the question initially, is basically how those of us who hold what others call religious beliefs are treated by some on this board. Simply holding beliefs about God causes some here to treat those that hold them as targets of ridicule, where everything from that the religious person's intelligence to their moral judgments get attacked, simply because they believe in God, which I believe does go to what you say the question was really about.
Kelly

Originally posted by scottishinnz
So I guess it comes down to where we set the bar, rather than a black and white, right and wrong, case. Personally, I can see no positive role for guns in society, hence I would have them banned, were I king for a day.

Religion, now that's a more difficult one. Many wars and such like have been fought around and over religion. However, religion al ...[text shortened]... i]per se[/i], but I am against religions that have the "don't think for yourself" doctorine.

So you would ban all guns? How would you enforce banning them? With knives perhaps?

Originally posted by whodey
So you would ban all guns? How would you enforce banning them? With knives perhaps?

Private ownership should be banned in my opinion. Law enforcement, military of course would still retain guns. There is no perfect way of controlling anything, and some (a minority) of criminals would still be able to get their hands on them.

Originally posted by twhitehead
...The same applies to religion. It is a tool but it is a specific tool and its availability makes people do certain things which are 'undesirable' that they would not be able to do or would not do if there was no religion.
The availability of guns, alcoholic drinks, SUVs, political parties etc does lead to problems which would not exist if they were not ...[text shortened]... ble. .... So the question is shouldn't we also discourage religion if it has harmful effects?

What harmful effects?


I would say rather that religion, most religions anyway, are positive.

Originally posted by whodey
So you would ban all guns? How would you enforce banning them? With knives perhaps?

Stop people from making them and selling them for a start. It is my understanding that in the UK, until recently, the police did not in general carry a gun.
Of course the army probably requires guns but even there, they have very limited use in peace time and the number that are produced and distributed far exceeds the actual needs.

Originally posted by eagleeye222001
What harmful effects?


I would say rather that religion, most religions anyway, are positive.

1. One major harmful effect of religion is an encouragement of ignorance or a tendency to deliberately mislead. For example the way that ID is being pushed on the education system in the US even though most of its proponents almost certainly don't believe it anyway and certainly lie in its support.
2. The misuse of religion for money making purposes. I know plenty of people who have gotten rich off religion.
3. The polarization of people into groups leading to conflicts. Almost all conflict zones in the world have more than one religion and the conflict is largely as a result of two religious groups not agreeing with each other.

Originally posted by eagleeye222001
What harmful effects?


I would say rather that religion, most religions anyway, are positive.

Yes, but then again, no-one expects the Spanish Inquisition.