Top Ten Reasons Why Religion is Pointless

mtndewlord

The Top Ten

1 We shouldn't need to look to the supernatural for morality and answers, we need to decide things for ourselves as human beings

"That's ridiculous...Better systems like a democracy do not require religion either." The issue here is not that the tenets of any particular religion must be strictly followed in order to preserve liberty, but rather that, as history CLEARLY proves, tyranny results when people recognize no higher authority than man. As for democracy, that is NOT the system laid out in the US Constitution. It failed miserably in Athens, where it was born, and its illegitimate implementation is destroying America, politically and fiscally. Lenin said democracy was merely an interim step between capitalism and communism, and that scenario is being played out in the US. Before you declare something "ridiculous," you need to have some clue as to what you're talking about.

Actually, there is some sense in religion, and it is clear from the fact that some people consider it to be meaningful to them. So, at least for somebody, it has sense and value, which makes the wording "Top Ten Reasons Why Religion is Pointless" simply false. Nevertheless, I agree that there are some pointless arguments based on religious dogmas. For example, the claim that human morality needs a supernatural basis. If you eliminate religion, they say, people will have no reason to follow moral rules. In fact, our moral sense exists quite separately from religion, and people can elaborate the notions of right and wrong without guidance of religion (for example, using some form of utilitarian ethics or deontological one).

This was tried in the 20th century. It was called communism. As a result of looking to "logic" to determine morality, 300 million people died "untimely" deaths. Thank you, Nietzsche, Marx and Darwin.

Wow, what a brilliant argument. Do you really think that people responsible for atrocities of the 20th century did what they did because they were atheists? By the way, Darwin never had a social theory so you cannot blame him - GeneralGrievance

Actually we should. As imperfect humans, we don’t have a clue how to get true happiness and how to get a successful life the right way. Even if your life may be successful, does it really make you happy? No. This is why lots of celebrities have commited suicide

V 3 Comments
2 There is no solid evidence for any religion

There is no solid evidence for any popular "science" purporting to explain the origins of the universe, life, life that reproduces itself, and most saliently, intelligent life that is self-replicating. Scientism is one of the most fanatical religions, ever.

Science is not a religion, there is solid evidence for scientific theories. Also a scientific theory is not a random idea someone has, it requires evidence. Evolution has plenty of evidence which includes DNA and the fossil record. Evolution has also been directly observed in laboratories in certain insects. - mtndewlord

"You gotta be kidding me! " While you may not worship science, and accept all its claims and premises with fanatical religious fervor, no matter how illogical, improbable and counterintuitive they may be, many others DO.

You gotta be kidding me! You do know that science is just theories explaining the universe? If you knew everything then we wouldn't even need science! I think this is a horrible argument...

But Science has evidence, theories require evidence, such as studying the common point where all stars came from, which is the point of the big bang - mtndewlord

I would like you to look at JW.org and see what you think for yourself. If you have interest and can understand it, you will see that Jehovah has solid evidence for the religion. If you don’t understand it or you don’t think it makes any sense, then Jehovah has not allowed you to understand the deep meanings

V 1 Comment
3 Any religion can be (and has been) taken too far

Yes, & that includes atheism (i.e.: Communist countries, etc.). - clusium

I’m going to just share my opinion: Jehovah’s Witnesses is the only religion based on my experience that hasn’t been bad or taken too far at all. It’s the only religion with solid evidence for things based on the Bible and has the Witnesses actually bonding with each other. I’ve never seen any other religion have that automatic relationship and connection with each other.

4 It often limits/discourages harmless behaviors (sex, homosexuality, contraceptives, etc)

"Harmless" behaviors? A highly arguable assertion.

I do admit that they’re harmless, but it’s not about it being harmful or not. It’s about if it makes OUR creator and Master (Jehovah God) feel bad. We owe it to Jehovah God to do whatever he pleases. He didn’t have to create us but he did, so we owe our lives to him. Besides, it’s more about the fact that it’s unnatural, not so much about it being harmless

Any creature is observed to have 2 directives: to survive and to mate. if any animal were to do anything that prevented one of those functions, they would be considered malfunctioning by most scientists. however, when humans do things that prevent reproduction (unnatural sex, abortion, sex without insemination, etc) we consider it completely normal. when a person stops desiring survival (starving themselves, suicidal actions, etc) we send them to a therapist. it seems to be inconsistent. and that is from a scientific perspective, and most atheism is built on a scientific foundation. say what you want to, but logic in and of itself proves that something always comes from something else, even if we don't understand it. and there is more than enough proof in the resurrection, just read the case for Christ. and if Jesus is the son of God, was born, died, and was raised, then everything else in the bible is true. I say that based on how most everything else is historical (possibly myth, ...more

5 It's not necessary to be moral

One of the more idiotic statements to grace this site.

But it's true, you don't need a religion to be moral, you wouldn't even know most people are atheist/agnostic unless you asked them - mtndewlord

It actually is if you think about it. Without religion, people make up their own ideas and rules, therefore going into the immoral side. Why do you think people out there in the world get drunk, have sex, and go into unnatural things? It’s because they do whatever they want without proper morals to guide them from religion like Jehovah’s Witnesses

No "religious war." Merely a debate about logic, and the lack thereof. If someone wants to reject Aristotlean logic regarding causation, and argue for spontaneous generation...go for it.

6 It often promises a perfect afterlife, which can distract us from living this life to the fullest

The concepts are not mutually exclusive, unless by "living this life to the fullest," you mean doing whatever the hell you want to do, no matter who or how many it harms.

Harming others is not okay obviously, I was not implying that, I think you missed the point - mtndewlord

The point was not "missed." It was simply judged invalid.

yes

Jehovah’s Witnesses do promise a new world in the future and a resurrection for the dead, which has evidence that it will come true. But the point is that Jehovah encourages us to make it through right now, with the new world in mind to keep us going. So this is more of a good thing, not a distraction

7 Causes war

Why does opinion in religion matter? This why I don't believe in humanity.

Might just be the opposite. Ever hear the expression, "There are no atheists in foxholes? "

Except for Paganism, Wicca. Did they cause war?

Lots of religions do, but not Jehovah’s Witnesses

8 It often rejects some sciences (evolution, global warming, etc)

"Evolution is science, there is plenty of evidence." No, there isn't. The "fossil record" contains ZERO intermediate species. Can you use "evolution" to explain irreducible complexity? Do you even know what it is? Can you explain the genesis of sexual reproduction? As for "climate change," if you think it's legitimate science, you're ignoring a world of fact, and simply accepting propaganda, and THAT'S "ridiculous."

There are transitional fossils that show transitions in a species evolving, it's as simple as a Google search. And irreducible complexity is a pseudoscience, meaning it fails to meet the standards of actual science. And there are many things Evolution can't explain, but that does not make it untrue. And as for climate change, what facts exactly? - mtndewlord

Again revert thing in science is not 100% proven because it's science! That's what it is! Theories! That's why we have a creation/evolution debate I support creation but I think both sides give good amount of evidence I've seen almost every evolution website and every creationist site. Both are persuasive, but people who just go with evolution are those who just want to not obey God even if they were brought up in a Christian home.

Remember that according to Science, gravity is also a theory as it's mechanism hasn't yet been proven. Just because something hasn't been proven with science yet doesn't mean that it will never be. The real benefit of science is that if something is not true, then it can be DISproved by a reproducible method. Nothing in religion can be disproved nor definitively proven. - Xean45

Young Earth Creationists reject evolution and the age of the Earth because of how they interpret the Bible - mtndewlord

That’s because evolution is not a true thing. Here’s a link about science for evolution:

https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/questions/science-and-the-bible/

This will show you that evolution isn’t so accurate. Rather, the Bible is

V 1 Comment
9 It's the only basis for opposing many social issues (Gay Marriage, Reproductive Rights, etc)

It most certainly is NOT the "only" reason. In fact, it's the least obvious one.

I’m going to be honest: That’s because the things you mentioned are wrong due to being unnatural.

10 It encourages blind obedience

"How is it ironic...? " The irony is in your "blind obedience" to "scientific" dogma. You believe there is "solid evidence" for macro evolution, the "evolution" of one species into another, when no such evidence exists, nor can such a process be biologically, rationally explained. The "fossil record" contains NO examples of intermediate species, including any validating DNA. Any observable "evolution" that has been "directly observed" represents MICRO evolution (green grasshoppers are more likely to survive in a green environment, and therefore pass on their DNA) in which NO "new species" is observed. Blindly accepting pronouncements which are contrary to both evidence and logic qualifies scientism as religion, indeed.

If you insist upon adhering to macro evolution as fact, then answer two questions: 1) Can you reconcile irreducible complexity with "evolution? ", and 2) Which ...more

Archaeopteryx, Australopithecus afarensis, Ambulocetus natans,... examples of intermediate species in the fossil record. There are many, many "missing links" that have been discovered. Denying that said evidence exists does not make it so.

The concept of evolution of species is a relatively new one. Naturally, any evolution observed during that time period is micro. Not being able to observe something that takes 100 years in a one month time period does not disprove the notion that the 100 year process could be possible.

Irreducible complexity, an evidence lacking pseudoscientific thought experiment posing as concrete reasoning, is refuted by comparative genomics and rejected by evolutionary biologists. It is deemed an "argument from ignorance".

The chicken or the egg? Another fun thought experiment for grade school children that relies on the perceived paradox of it being impossible for one species to bear another. However, since species are ...more - Primersk

So does your obvious political indoctrination. There is great irony in the fact that you don't see it.

True, political indoctrination happens and can be harmful, I agree. How is it ironic to my statement? - mtndewlord

Blind Obedience to something with no strong evidence for to be more specific - mtndewlord

Bit mad

V 3 Comments

The Contenders

11 It creates unnecessary boundaries between people

Christians and Muslims will often mock "new age" religion, and vice versa. Many political fights and wars are fought over religion. Even something as simple as a friendship/relationship can be ruined because of religious differences - mtndewlord

Well people are going to have opinions and different religions. You’re just going to have to deal with it, knowing that Jehovah will make you feel better

12 Religions always judge you

And people should never make judgements because all ideas are equally valid, and all behaviors are just wonderful, right?

That’s a part of life my friend, people will always judge you no matter what. Religion isn’t the only reason for judgement

13 It's too controversial

I think that was really good it has helped me lea

Puts a lot of pressure on me

Again, people will judge you and have disagreements. That’s what happens with, Oh I don’t know, everything else!

14 It causes arguments
15 The controversy with making fun of the religious

South Park, Family Guy, Sausage Party.

BAdd New Item
P