How fucked is the human race

[BTGBullseye]

Why do you think there should be no religious schools? Do you feel for some reason that they are incapable of providing good education to the students?

 

Schools are mandatory, going to a religious one is optional.

[Zelpa]

Why do you think there should be no religious schools? Do you feel for some reason that they are incapable of providing good education to the students?

 

Schools are mandatory, going to a religious one is optional.

 

Children don't get to choose which school they go to though, it's their parents that make that decision. Much like the separation of church and state in the US I don't think schools should have the ability to only allow people of a certain religion in the school. Are you Catholic by choice? Did you read over every bible and decide which one is the best? Or is it because your parents are Catholic? It just seems like indoctrination to me. I know you religious schools can't legally FORCE you to be of a certain religion, but they sure as hell try their hardest to.

[AlanMor]

I believe that good people meet good ones. And if you have problems in your mind, people wiil be fucked for you !

[BTGBullseye]

Children don't get to choose which school they go to though, it's their parents that make that decision. Much like the separation of church and state in the US I don't think schools should have the ability to only allow people of a certain religion in the school. Are you Catholic by choice? Did you read over every bible and decide which one is the best? Or is it because your parents are Catholic? It just seems like indoctrination to me. I know you religious schools can't legally FORCE you to be of a certain religion, but they sure as hell try their hardest to.

That argument could be made for any form of education... Especially ones that lean towards one political party or another. Why have schools at all if the kids have to choose what schooling type they get from experience or knowledge they don't yet have? Don't take away one valid schooling method for an illogical reason. (it seems like a logical argument, but take a look past the surface and you will see that it is not)

 

As it is, every schooling system currently in existence is a form of indoctrination. Which school you go to determines what type of indoctrination you receive. Typical public schools teach many theories as fact, (like evolution) and generally push the students towards the Democratic side of the political spectrum. Typical Christian schools teach the bible as fact, (there really isn't any scientific counter-evidence that isn't itself highly controversial) some theories as fact, (like creationism) and generally push students towards the Republican-Independant side of the political spectrum. Why do you think it's a good idea to ban any of it?

[Zelpa]

Children don't get to choose which school they go to though, it's their parents that make that decision. Much like the separation of church and state in the US I don't think schools should have the ability to only allow people of a certain religion in the school. Are you Catholic by choice? Did you read over every bible and decide which one is the best? Or is it because your parents are Catholic? It just seems like indoctrination to me. I know you religious schools can't legally FORCE you to be of a certain religion, but they sure as hell try their hardest to.

That argument could be made for any form of education... Especially ones that lean towards one political party or another. Why have schools at all if the kids have to choose what schooling type they get from experience or knowledge they don't yet have? Don't take away one valid schooling method for an illogical reason. (it seems like a logical argument, but take a look past the surface and you will see that it is not)

 

As it is, every schooling system currently in existence is a form of indoctrination. Which school you go to determines what type of indoctrination you receive. Typical public schools teach many theories as fact, (like evolution) and generally push the students towards the Democratic side of the political spectrum. Typical Christian schools teach the bible as fact, (there really isn't any scientific counter-evidence that isn't itself highly controversial) some theories as fact, (like creationism) and generally push students towards the Republican-Independant side of the political spectrum. Why do you think it's a good idea to ban any of it?

 

It is an interesting question—what is and what isn't indoctrination? I can't really speak for American schools, but I can't say the schools I've been to have really pushed me towards a certain political ideology. They have of course taught things that I disagree with, but those are few and far between. I think the main issue I have with religious schools is that they try to teach something that should be taken as moral advice as the truth. We've done religious studies in the past, from around grade 3-5, and that mainly focussed on Christianity. They didn't, however, teach it as fact. Most if not all my friends are atheists or agnostic, and I think that comes from the way religion is taught in schools over here. Is one religion better than another? It's all relative to what you're immersed in while growing up. I can say subjectively that I disagree with certain religions like Islam for their teachings, but I can also say the same for most religions. Do you think we should have more Islamic schools? Or do you think Catholicism should be the only religion taught? I see religion more like moral teachings, but I think people should be free to make their own minds up about those issues instead of being taught them in school. Having mandatory religious classes would be a smart move, or just teaching more about them in classes like Humanities. That way people can make their own decisions on what's right and what's wrong.

 

But to play devil's advocate, what's the difference between teaching morals in schools and teaching a certain religion as fact? If I say to someone "Killing is wrong" do I have to back that up with facts right there and then? Or are certain issues 'obvious' in a sense? I think some topics may be, but of course that could just be side effect of the society I've grown up in. Should every opinion have to be backed up with the scientific method? I think that's one of the other issues I have with how certain religions are taught in religious schools, they say things that fly in the face of logic. How can someone say that the Earth is 6000 years old when we have proof of it being older? Of course you could always use the rebuttal "God just planted those dinosaur bones there when he made the Earth", and there's no real way of arguing with that.

 

On a more personal note, do you think all religions are equal? Or do you think Catholicism is objectively 'correct'? Is there something specific that makes you stay Catholic? I don't think I've ever had a belief so strong that it lasts my entire life, I tend questions issues too much.

[BTGBullseye]

As much as I'd like to talk on everything you posted, I'm just on the verge of going to bed, so I need to limit myself to just a few specific replies...

 

I think that's one of the other issues I have with how certain religions are taught in religious schools, they say things that fly in the face of logic. How can someone say that the Earth is 6000 years old when we have proof of it being older? Of course you could always use the rebuttal "God just planted those dinosaur bones there when he made the Earth", and there's no real way of arguing with that.

6000 years is from when Adam and Eve left the garden, not from the beginning of the planet. Also, there isn't any proof that it's older, just evidence that points that direction.

 

As for the dinosaur bones, they could very easily have been placed there by the great flood. (which could have been caused by the same meteor that some scientists believe killed off the dinosaurs)

 

Also, the carbon dating method currently employed requires that atmospheric C14 be a constant, but even in recent times it varies not only over time, but very significantly based on location. It can theoretically be the difference between something appearing to be 200m years old, or 4000 years old. The people that came up with that dating method, and the testing facilities, have said that it's inaccurate for anything under (I think) 30k years, but they have no frame of reference to prove that it would ever be accurate.

 

On a more personal note, do you think all religions are equal? Or do you think Catholicism is objectively 'correct'?

I believe Christ came and died for everyone's sins, and that God is love... Sin hurts man, not God. Everything else related to the Christian religions is simply a preference of how you worship, and how you keep from hurting yourself and others with your sins. Other religions may be highly moral, (or not) but they aren't reality in my experience.

 

Is there something specific that makes you stay Catholic?

Life experience; there tend to be a lot fewer hypocrites in the Catholic faith than there are in others. (fewer even than Atheists) There is also a much longer history of scientist Catholics than there is of non-Catholic scientists. (it's only in recent times that secular culture has taken over the sciences, and arguably slowed our scientific progress)

 

I don't think I've ever had a belief so strong that it lasts my entire life, I tend questions issues too much.

The Catholic religion doesn't teach you not to question your belief... That's not what it's about. It's about growing closer to God. I know I've had a fair few of my own beliefs thrown out after a bit of research, but never the core of the faith. (Christ came and died for everyone's sins, and God is love... Sin hurts man, not God.)

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

I might come back later and reply more in-depth, (it's rare to come across someone who isn't offended that my belief even exists, and is willing to discuss it in an amicable manner) but it's time for sleep.

[Reverend_UshankaCat_]

Sounds like this is going a bit off-topic, I'm going to suggest making a new thread for this or taking it to the "Discuss your Opinion" thread, since I too have a few things I'd like to add to that conversation!

 

OT:

I think your view depends on your personality. An optimist (like me!) is always going to see things a bit more optimistic than a pessimist, who will see things more pessimistic. That is also the reason I haven't said anything here before. As an optimist I see everything through rose-tinted glasses, so I'm afraid when I say that I think the fuckedness of humanity is still in the manageable area, my view could just be completely distorted. I would think the same if I were a pessimist though.

So I think humanity has always been a bit on the fucked side, but hey- even the Cold War (mostly) ended.

[BTGBullseye]

Please, make the thread... I'll join it.

[Alyxx Thorne]

I think despite the fact we are headed down a downward spiral, it's always gonna be about managing the resources. As long as we can make do with what we have, we'll find a way to survive. For now I'd say managable but in the future... hard to say.

[Selfsurprise]

Alyxx's point reminds me of a particular anthropological definition of natural selection I've heard of, that species (or societies, cultures, etc) don't have to "fail" in the immediate sense in order to go extinct, they merely have to "less successful" generationally. It really depends how you want to define how or why the human race is "fucked", "fucked" as in no longer existent or "fucked" as in a degraded situation. The fortunes of nations and polities wax and wane, but for a species of our diverse ways and means there will be inevitable survivals, rude forms and adaptations.

[Alyxx Thorne]

We've survived pretty harsh situations. We've survived the plague, we've survived natural disasters that wiped out entire cities and islands. We're diverse enough to sustain for quite a while longer I think, and we are capable of adapting to situations.

 

Will things get worse? Undoubtedly. But I think we can adapt to the changes. I'm an optimist in general.

[Templar Knight]

IMO, we're a very adaptable species. We've accomplished more than any other living species we know of on Earth simply by the fact that we've projected ourselves off of our own planet. I mean, a professor of mine told me that during my Social History of Truth class and it was kinda mind blowing to think about. No other species on Earth that we know of have been able to do what we have done, and if that's not a testament to human ingenuity and our ability to solve a problem IDK what is.

 

When focused and given a clear and coordinated goal, we have been able to solve major problems that have plagued humanity since our species' inception (smallpox for example). The main problem right now is that we lack that focus, drive, and coordination when trying to tackle stuff like energy or other more social issues. They don't care about it enough to set aside more petty issues, in fact right now seems to be the peak of making petty issues the main concern of the day while ignoring more major issues, which has been the case in other points in history as well for many other civilizations.

 

I believe we're not fucked, I just think things are going to get tougher for a lot of people, and not everyone is going to be able to adapt as quickly to suit those changes. No different than during the time the Black Plague came through in the middle ages (I mean, if you want a best candidate for what should have collapsed civilization and rendered humanity extinct in both natural and theological terms, that should have been it, since it basically matched the 1/3 of the Earth's population dying and other social and climate circumstances as stated in Revelations and completely destroyed Medieval society. The difference being that the Renaissance came out of it rather than the whole world ending and everyone dying as tons of people thought it would at the time.)

 

I mean, just look at jobs, most people have to work at least two jobs to be able to have decent living conditions, spending money, and still save money away with the hope of retirement some day. Or if not two jobs for one person, then with multiple incomes by multiple people, the old reality of a couple with one stay at home parent and another being the bread-winner is almost entirely a fantasy right now, and the days of single life, single jobs are over in most places of modern convenience for those starting out, and those that are unable to adapt to that lifestyle are going to wind up screwed.

 

The same professor I spoke of earlier also told us that the odds are, most people out of University today are not likely to have life-long careers in the same field or job, its just not feasible with less and less companies willing to pay for full-time when they can just go part-time or contracts. More likely, every five years we'll have to change jobs. Its a marketplace that requires the ability to be loose and adaptable, and not everyone is going to be able to do it.

 

And I mean, this is coming from someone who is generally a pessimist about most things.

[Vapymid]

we've projected ourselves off of our own planet.

Well, not quite yet... But hopefully we're on our way there...

 

I generally share this sentiment with you and your teacher... Just want to throw in a couple of thoughts to consider.

 

I don't think we should or have rights to talk of our species' achievements in segregation from all other species on this planet. In a way it's like an apple seed boasting about it's ingenious construction that allows a whole apple tree to grow from it... Forgetting that it took an apple tree (and the whole chain of evolution before it) to produce that little seed in the first place.

 

So - we are standing on the shoulders of giants - from amoebae to elephants and cows and triceratops... We are the product of Earth's life and perhaps it is not so much our achievement but our duty to continue from where the Mother Nature let us go - and that brings me to the next point...

 

Humanity faces problems when we hit the limits - of ourselves or of our environment. The issue of the lack of focus and motivation and sense of purpose is IMHO is just a sign that we've reached one of those limits again.

 

What happens when we reach the limits of our confinement - we break through. And the obvious direction for breaking through, really, is going to space. Not with some remote control toys, but for real.

 

I believe that this is what the "intention" of the life as a whole on Earth is.

 

It created a species which is at last capable of controlling the matter in real time and not in evolutionary timescales... It gave us enough easy-to-reach energy by conserving the sunlight in the form of the fossil fuels for our first steps out of the crib. It kept enough fissionable materials that we can use for venturing farther away... We are the apple seed within an apple and our job is now to move away from the mother tree and plant ourselfves and grow a new tree. Somewhere... anywhere.

 

And until we do that, life will push us subtly with one crisis after another, making us move, think, act...

 

That is all, I think

 

Regards

[Templar Knight]

we've projected ourselves off of our own planet.

Well, not quite yet... But hopefully we're on our way there...

 

I generally share this sentiment with you and your teacher... Just want to throw in a couple of thoughts to consider.

 

I don't think we should or have rights to talk of our species' achievements in segregation from all other species on this planet. In a way it's like an apple seed boasting about it's ingenious construction that allows a whole apple tree to grow from it... Forgetting that it took an apple tree (and the whole chain of evolution before it) to produce that little seed in the first place.

 

So - we are standing on the shoulders of giants - from amoebae to elephants and cows and triceratops... We are the product of Earth's life and perhaps it is not so much our achievement but our duty to continue from where the Mother Nature let us go - and that brings me to the next point...

 

Humanity faces problems when we hit the limits - of ourselves or of our environment. The issue of the lack of focus and motivation and sense of purpose is IMHO is just a sign that we've reached one of those limits again.

 

What happens when we reach the limits of our confinement - we break through. And the obvious direction for breaking through, really, is going to space. Not with some remote control toys, but for real.

 

I believe that this is what the "intention" of the life as a whole on Earth is.

 

It created a species which is at last capable of controlling the matter in real time and not in evolutionary timescales... It gave us enough easy-to-reach energy by conserving the sunlight in the form of the fossil fuels for our first steps out of the crib. It kept enough fissionable materials that we can use for venturing farther away... We are the apple seed within an apple and our job is now to move away from the mother tree and plant ourselfves and grow a new tree. Somewhere... anywhere.

 

And until we do that, life will push us subtly with one crisis after another, making us move, think, act...

 

That is all, I think

 

Regards

 

Exactly.

 

By projection, I meant simply the fact that we've been able to leave the surface of our planet and land on objects beyond it or send stuff out into space. Colonization and terraforming will be another story and the next step, since its the only real way to break the ceiling we've currently hit, as you said.

 

And I'd clarify that the species comment isn't taken in segregation of any others on the planet, it simply stating the fact that we're the only living things in history from our planet (that we know of) to have accomplished the feats we have. Could it have been done without the Earth? No, but the point I was making wasn't that we didn't do it without the world and everything else on it, the point is that there is no living species that has ever come close to what we've been able to do, barring potentially extraterrestrials.

 

I believe that as resources become more and more scarce, space will become more and more appealing for actually funding the exploration and colonization of.

[Vapymid]

Ah... well - for me "projecting" means reaching some destination and not just dropping back to where we came from like some kind of an oversized flea

 

Well, I could kind of agree on "projecting" if we talk about the Moon, hehe... Though, as any fule noes - it was all just a NASA conspiracy

 

Regards

[Rocket Propelled Gordon]

Example 3: The USA is getting so anti-religious that they are taking down stickers at bus stops that say "Jesus loves you!" and claiming they are "hate speech". (this is happening right now in Pueblo Colorado)

That's kinda bizarre, how do you classify something like that as hate speech? Now I do agree with the sentiment that religion in the US should be toned down and become more private. IMO the way the US treats religion as something to shout about and to attach merchandise to is extremely disrespectful to the religion itself. While I think stuff like religious t-shirts and religious stickers are disgustingly garish they aren't hate speech. I don't even know how one might reach that conclusion.

 

OT: The real world doesn't really affect me much. While it is undoubtedly fucked once I realized that I had no power in any way, shape or form to unfuck it I stopped caring. As far as I'm concerned the world could burn and I still wouldn't care. That would imply that I believed that life is valuable and I don't. Life is nothing miraculous. The dust mites that live on top of my PC have as much "purpose" in life as I do and they could be considered alive. Yet I still murder trillions of them on a monthly basis. So what does that say about life in of itself? Nothing, because life has no point. As stupid as this may sound we don't choose life chooses us. We are a byproduct of existence itself, nothing more.

 

I find it baffling when overly-optimistic, shortsighted, grandiose people believe they can unfuck the world or even possibly change it for the better. They can't handle what fate has placed before them and so they scatter about like ants, panicked about what they can do. Except they can't do anything. They would rather waste even more time putting up a fight against something unwinnable then simply come to terms with their reality and move on. We truly are Sisyphus incarnate.

 

So in order to answer the question I would say it is quite manageable if we ignore it that is.

 

 

Perhaps it's just me, but I've never actually seen anything in our constitution that says, "seperation of church and state".

 

This was founded as, above all else, a christian nation. Often times you'll hear this though, without any evidence to back it up.

 

Anytime religion is mentioned within the confines of government today people cry, "Separation of Church and State". Many people think this statement appears in the first amendment of the U.S. Constitution and therefore must be strictly enforced. However, the words: "separation", "church", and "state" do not even appear in the first amendment. The first amendment reads...

 

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

 

The statement about a wall of separation between church and state was made in a letter on January 1, 1802, by Thomas Jefferson to a church (the Danbury Baptist Association of Connecticut).

 

The congregation heard a widespread rumor that the Congregationalists, another denomination, were to become the national religion. This was very alarming to people who knew about religious persecution in England by the state established church. Jefferson made it clear in his letter to the Danbury Congregation that the separation was to be that government would not establish a national religion or dictate to men how to worship God. Jefferson's letter from which the phrase "separation of church and state" was written to affirm first amendment rights. Jefferson wrote:

 

"I contemplate with solemn reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church and State." (1)

 

The reason Jefferson choose the expression "separation of church and state" was because he was addressing a Baptist congregation; a denomination of which he was not a member. Jefferson wanted to remove all fears that the state would make dictates to the church. He was establishing common ground with the Baptists by borrowing the words of Roger Williams, one of the Baptist's own prominent preachers. Williams had said:

 

"When they have opened a gap in the hedge or wall of separation between the garden of the Church and the wilderness of the world, God hath ever broke down the wall itself, removed the candlestick, and made his garden a wilderness, as at this day. And that therefore if He will eer please to restore His garden and paradise again, it must of necessity be walled in peculiarly unto Himself from the world..."(2)

 

-----------------------

 

TL;DR.. I'd love to debate further with you on this via PM.

[thou]

It's pretty surprising how nobody chose "garden of eden". There are a lot of people who just ignore all the bad things going on in life.

[BTGBullseye]

It's pretty surprising how nobody chose "garden of eden". There are a lot of people who just ignore all the bad things going on in life.

If any of us were that kind of person, we wouldn't be on this site...

[thou]

lol

[Selous Templar]

I'd say that the human race needs an entire "Phoenix" effect if it wants to save itself. I am saying this in relation to Western civilization however, the 2nd and 3rd world are still developing to have a major-human-race-history changing impact.

Western civilization, mainly Europe, has a hell of a lot of damage control to do if it's going to last more than a Century from now without being destroyed. If I had to predict the main force that has a chance to save the West, it would be Far Right Nationalist Populism.

Yeah, if I am seeing THAT as the West's best chance for salvation, then you can see that the West has some major problems on hand.