Why is the good in Faith ignored?

[Kagekatsu]

There are good people who belong to any particular faith, Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Shintoism, Scientology (I kid.)

Yet it seems the good deeds of those who belong to a particular faith tends to be ignored nowadays.

Instead we hear stories of the WBC preaching "God Hates Fags!", Jihadists preaching Israel's destruction, trouble stirred up by Ultra-Zionists, even Tojo and his crew during WWII were driven by extreme Shintoism. (Haven't heard anything bad from the Buddhists though.)

It to me doesn't seem fair that they get all the screentime and thus drives home the negative image that most people of faith must be an axe-wielding polygamist whack-job who stands on his porch preaching with a shotgun. To me, those kind of people DO NOT represent what their faith originally stood for.

Of course, they all make good news stories to fill air-time these days. But it is also hurting people who belong to any religion when the whackjobs of faith get more attention than they actually deserve.

I suppose Gary Larson was right,

When God created the world, He added a few jerks to make it intresting.

:sweatdrop

[Jagon Fox]

this is an easy answer. because unless something spectacular happened, ie buddhist monk saves infant from burning building, then its not really considered newsworthy. to concentrate on the assholes who go around bombing people, beating some kid to death because they were (insert social taboo here) etc. is gonna garner alot more attention. what are newspeople? why they are professional gossipers! think about when you were in school. is trisha getting an A in history more gossip worthy? or is trisha was seen making out with someone else's boyfriend more gossip worthy? same concept.

[Mider T]

When someone tells the good news, it's called preaching.
When someone tells the bad news, it's called reporting.

Most people here seem to prefer the latter.

[Ejaculation Storm]

Cause it's not news if someone is *gasp* acting in a kind way like their religion tells them to.

It is news, however, when supposedly "peaceful" and "wonderful" religious folk fuck shit up.

[ButtholeSurfer]

Sadly the negatives outweigh the positives. You hear about all these horrible things, and then you hear about These groups helping out people in a natural disaster, but when I think of that I think of it as a negative because they refuse to help those who don't convert to their religion.

[Kagekatsu]

I suppose my thread is more "Stating the obvious" so to speak.

It still puzzles me though on how such people can do this.

[ButtholeSurfer]

Simple:
Media+Batshit Insane Religious Fanatics+ Their followers= Primetime gold. I could find many things negative about any faith and even the charitable ones have something negative to make them appear to be less. Simply put no one is perfect and bad news burns like a forest fire.

[Kagekatsu]

Simple:
Media+Batshit Insane Religious Fanatics+ Their followers= Primetime gold. I could find many things negative about any faith and even the charitable ones have something negative to make them appear to be less. Simply put no one is perfect and bad news burns like a forest fire.

I can agree on that.

[Al-Yasa]

in my opinion i think its becuase of :

The media e.g fox, thesun , sky

Aggressive atheist( attacks other religions and is often intolerant to the follower of other religions)


The bad people who commut the crimes e.g al qaeda, osama , george bush

Political Parties e.g BNP

[Kusogitsune]

If even religious people ignore the good part of their faith, why shouldn't we?

[Kagekatsu]

in my opinion i think its becuase of :

The media e.g fox, thesun , sky

Aggressive atheist( attacks other religions and is often intolerant to the follower of other religions)


The bad people who commut the crimes e.g al qaeda, osama , george bush

Political Parties e.g BNP


One thing I find ironic, It's on Fox guys like O'Reilly and Hannity that say their standing up for the traditional values of America, religion included.

So can I pray tell why their making it worse for their cause everytime they report the latest frak-up from the Westboro Church.

[Mider T]

Sadly the negatives outweigh the positives. You hear about all these horrible things, and then you hear about These groups helping out people in a natural disaster, but when I think of that I think of it as a negative because they refuse to help those who don't convert to their religion.

Yeah....no. A person who has a negative mindset probably isn't going to see much good.

[Kusogitsune]

One thing I find ironic, It's on Fox guys like O'Reilly and Hannity that say their standing up for the traditional values of America, religion included.

So can I pray tell why their making it worse for their cause everytime they report the latest frak-up from the Westboro Church.

Mansions yachts and mistresses don't pay for themselves.

[ButtholeSurfer]

Yeah....no. A person who has a negative mindset probably isn't going to see much good.

Sorry if I feel it to be wrong to send missionaries to convert people of a recent disaster, rather than genuinely help them and then fuck off.

[Mider T]

Who doesn't genuinely help? That's exactly what I'm talking about.

[Kagekatsu]

Mansions yachts and mistresses don't pay for themselves.

Yeah, I forget about that.

[Sama'el]

What inherent goodness of faith? I don't see there being any more goodness in believers than there are in nonbelievers.

[Kagekatsu]

What inherent goodness of faith? I don't see there being any more goodness in believers than there are in nonbelievers.

Have now realised I may have blundered a bit putting inherent in my starting thread.

My apologies.

[Masaki]

Because people can be good without faith.

[avraell]

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c149/pilar_no_oro/Orochimaru__the_Snake_by_Nick_Ian.jpg?t=1233882929

[Kagekatsu]

Because people can be good without faith.

Your correct on that.

It's just, when I see the latest report of some fanatic raping a 12-year old girl. And it makes national news while the good deeds of others, be it religious or not-religious.

I only have this to say:

:facepalm

[Sarutobi sasuke]

Yet it seems the goodness of faith tends to be ignored nowadays.


That's because "goodess" comes from our altruistic nature which is a consequence of us being a social animal and not our predisposition to believe in comforting myths. Infact faith can override our altruistic nature as demonstrated by the extreme examples in your OP, these people may seem abhorrent to us but they genuine think they are doing the right thing.

In short there is no good in faith it allows us to believe anything without evidence and closes our minds to the possibility of being wrong.


Aggressive atheist( attacks other religions and is often intolerant to the follower of other religions)


Atheism be it aggressive or otherwise is not a religion. The same way not playing football is not a sport and not collecting stamps is not a hobby.

[Hwon]

Even though I'm heavily against organized religions and faith based systems I still know that positive things have and do come out of faith. No one who argues against faith ignores this. People are arguing not that faith is bad, but that faith can be used to persuade Good people to do Bad things. Imagine if the people who attended the WBC never came across such a place. If they had been as fanatic with different beliefs they might have ended up Saints who helped encourage peace and tolerance.

What's really being ignored is this problem of faith that stems from the fact that it is the polar opposite of systems we use to distinguish between what is likely true vs what is likely false. Anything can become valid in faith so long as someone is persuaded enough to value believing something is true over being skeptical and requiring a claim to "earn" one's trust through rational means.

[DremolitoX]

Because people can be good without faith.

Then why bitch and moan when someone with faith does something stupid, since they could also be bad without faith?

[parker pyne]

Then why bitch and moan when someone with faith does something stupid, since they could also be bad without faith?
Because in a news report, it is advisable to include the motives of the criminal. In certain cases, criminals are motivated by the ideals of their religions.

However, If their religious identity is irrelevant, then they will not include it. Have you ever heard the headline "Protestant Man Robs Bank", when the man's pious beliefs are not even pertinent to the crime at hand?


Atheism be it aggressive or otherwise is not a religion. The same way not playing football is not a sport and not collecting stamps is not a hobby.
Don't get me wrong, I don't believe atheism to be a religion, but that analogy does not sit right with me.

So if
playing football is a precondition to being a athlete,
and collecting stamps is a precondition to being a hobbyist,
is believing in God a precondition to being a religious person?

What about religions like buddhism and scientology (okay, scientology is more of a business but it's generally assumed to be a religion) which don't necessarily believe in a divine being? It's still a religion is it not? So in that sense, can atheism be a religion?

So the thing we need to do is to find a common ground for all existing religions. They all seem to disseminate officially established doctrines which are to be followed by the practitioners of that certain religion; atheism doesn't. So the atheist 'movement' isn't a religion, it's a belief.

[Danny Lilithborne]

Even though I'm heavily against organized religions and faith based systems I still know that positive things have and do come out of faith. No one who argues against faith who is not a complete fuckwit ignores this.
I really needed to fix it because that sentence as it stood was just oh so wrong.

[Sarutobi sasuke]

Don't get me wrong, I don't believe atheism to be a religion, but that analogy does not sit right with me.

So if
playing football is a precondition to being a athlete,
and collecting stamps is a precondition to being a hobbyist,
is believing in God a precondition to being a religious person?

What about religions like buddhism and scientology (okay, scientology is more of a business but it's generally assumed to be a religion) which don't necessarily believe in a divine being? It's still a religion is it not? So in that sense, can atheism be a religion?

I see your point and it is a good one. Maybe I should have said "atheism is no more a religion than theism is".
You can indeed have religious atheists such as Buddhists. But atheism it's self is not a religion it is simply the lack of a belief in a deity.


So the thing we need to do is to find a common ground for all existing religions. They all seem to disseminate officially established doctrines which are to be followed by the practitioners of that certain religion; atheism doesn't. So the atheist 'movement' isn't a religion, it's a belief.

No it's not a belief either. it's the absence of belief this is where my analogy fits perfectly

[parker pyne]

I've always tried to argue against the sentiment "Atheism is a lack of belief, not a belief."

Can't it be both?

It is a lack of belief in God,
and a belief of God's non-existence.

Essentially, the phrases "I don't believe in God" and "I believe that God does not exist" mean the same thing. I don't get why the latter is more fallacious than the former.

Oh well, it's more a linguistic problem than a philosophical one, so it's not something really something to fret over too much.

[Sarutobi sasuke]

I've always tried to argue against the sentiment "Atheism is a lack of belief, not a belief."

Can't it be both?

It is a lack of belief in God,
and a belief of God's non-existence.

Essentially, the phrases "I don't believe in God" and "I believe that God does not exist" mean the same thing. I don't get why the latter is more fallacious than the former.

Oh well, it's more a linguistic problem than a philosophical one, so it's not something really something to fret over too much.

Well there is that whole Atheist/Agnostic debate flying around with people hurling differing definitions at each other but I'm not much interested in that.

It think the difference between the to phrases is the this the former is a statement of skepticism where as the latter is an unsupported and unsupportable claim as you can't prove anything doesn't exist.

It think Russel's tea pot is a great example. Now I don't believe it exists I think it's up to those who think it does to provide convincing evidence of it. However I would never out right claim it does not exist only that there is no evidence to justify a position of belief in it.

Edit*

The way I see it is that there are two mutually exclusive claims of fact regarding God.
1) God exists
2) God does not exist

And I don't believe either due to the lack of evidence.

[Tommygun]

Interesting thread..


If christians or muslims do something extreme, the media is all over it with headlines such as:
"Gay grilling for Christians", "RELIGIOUS WARS A Bloody zeal".. and also just recently in a norwegian newspaper: "The God Who Won't Die", "Christians against Black-Metal"

Yeah.. the list goes on and on..


I wonder..
If a christian man kills another man..
What do you think the headlines would be?

"Christian Murder", "Christian hypocrite".. or something along those lines..?

Now..
If an atheist killed another man..

Could the titles be: "Atheist murder"..? or would it just be "Male (42) murdered male (24)"...?


It's kind of fun to speculate around..

[Sarutobi sasuke]

Interesting thread..


If christians or muslims do something extreme, the media is all over it with headlines such as:
"Gay grilling for Christians", "RELIGIOUS WARS A Bloody zeal".. and also just recently in a norwegian newspaper: "The God Who Won't Die", "Christians against Black-Metal"

Yeah.. the list goes on and on..


I wonder..
If a christian man kills another man..
What do you think the headlines would be?

"Christian Murder", "Christian hypocrite".. or something along those lines..?

Now..
If an atheist killed another man..

Could the titles be: "Atheist murder"..? or would it just be "Male (42) murdered male (24)"...?


It's kind of fun to speculate around..

It all comes down to why people do what they do, religion is a motivating factor, and when it's a motivation for something newsworthy then it should be identified.

[|)/-\\/\/|\|]

People get delighted with bad news, that's all. I mean regardless of religion, how much of the reported news is "good news" and how much is "bad news". People want to hear about the real "shit".

[Tommygun]

It all comes down to why people do what they do, religion is a motivating factor, and when it's a motivation for something newsworthy then it should be identified.

That's true, but not 100% of the time.

Newspapers have, maybe not often, but they have added the "christian" stamp on people even though the motivation had nothing to do with that fact.

As I mentioned.. it doesn't happen all the time, but I have seen it.

[adee]

Why is the good in Hitler ignored?

[Tommygun]

Why is the good in Hitler ignored?


that was very offensive, just so you know..

[Saufsoldat]

that was very offensive, just so you know..

Yes, the truth is often offensive.

[Sarutobi sasuke]

Yes, the truth is often offensive.

That's offensive :uwah

[Louis-954]

When God created the world, He added a few jerks to make it intresting.I think you are the jerk if you think people cant be good without faith. Im catholic but just because I do a good deed does that mean I should expect everyone to show me attention for it?? More so than someone who is an Athiest even? It doesnt matter dude, if you're gonna do good then do good. Dont expect to be praised left and right for it, you know what you did and thats all that matters.

and just for the record, good things are put on the news everyday, perhaps not as often as the bad, but still.

[Kagekatsu]

I think you are the jerk if you think people cant be good without faith. Im catholic but just because I do a good deed does that mean I should expect everyone to show me attention for it?? More so than someone who is an Athiest even? It doesnt matter dude, if you're gonna do good then do good. Dont expect to be praised left and right for it, you know what you did and thats all that matters.

and just for the record, good things are put on the news everyday, perhaps not as often as the bad, but still.

I understand what your saying, but you may have put my post out of context.

When I said "jerks," I'm not referring to atheists, agnostics, or any of the sort. I'm referring to the people whose "supposed" actions meant for the good of their faith ends up making everyone look bad.

Examples, the WBC posting God Hates Fags! gives Christians a black eye, Same for a Muslim Jihadist preaching Israel's destruction, ultra-Zionists can also be included.

I'm not expecting praise for the good of religion, what I am getting pretty tired though is everytime some extremist causes trouble and makes headlines, it gives the wrong impression to everyone because the news has to profile EVERY single incident.

They don't have to post pictures of Christians repairing a Muslim's house, but they could also maybe lessen the amount of pictures being posted of Christians beating up Muslims.

Balance it out so to speak.

[Tenacious Lee]

black and muslim people have it 10x worse then you, get over it

[Danny Lilithborne]

Yes, the truth is often offensive.
No! The idea that Hitler might have - helped his country?! Gasp! No, he's the devil incarnate!

[Kagekatsu]

black and muslim people have it 10x worse then you, get over it

I'm not asking for sympathy here, just asking a question.

No problem here.

[Tenacious Lee]

I'm not asking for sympathy here, just asking a question.

No problem here.

its because the good in absolutely everything is ignored.

no one is directly being targeted, but America wants to keep the news exciting, and you'll lose to that crazed religous maniac every time.

[Kagekatsu]

its because the good in absolutely everything is ignored.

no one is directly being targeted, but America wants to keep the news exciting, and you'll lose to that crazed religous maniac every time.

Than I guess I'm hopeless than.

Ah well :sweatdrop

[Saufsoldat]

No! The idea that Hitler might have - helped his country?! Gasp! No, he's the devil incarnate!

Who said that he didn't help? It's just that the damage he caused outweighs the good he did by a huge margin.

[Tommygun]

Who said that he didn't help? It's just that the damage he caused outweighs the good he did by a huge margin.


Hey, look at the means.. "How" did he make it better..
Not by being nice..

[Saufsoldat]

Hey, look at the means.. "How" did he make it better..
Not by being nice..

He was really nice to the German people. Ever heard one of his speeches? He praised them to the skies.

[Tommygun]

He was really nice to the German people. Ever heard one of his speeches? He praised them to the skies.

LOL.. You're just begging for it.. You actually want a debate.

His speeches were of course great, he needed the people to be on his side.
But "how he did things".. Is something completely different..

[Kagekatsu]

Umm... No offense guys, but when I started this thread, discussing if Adolf Hitler was good wasn't exactly at the top of my list.

[DeterminedIdiot]

cause people want drama. people are naturally attracted to misfortune because then they can say "atleast thats not me" they is no media attention on good news

[Kagekatsu]

cause people want drama. people are naturally attracted to misfortune because then they can say "atleast thats not me" they is no media attention on good news

Yes, then there wouldn't even be any "exciting" news, no one would watch TV, and Stewie's lament comes true.

Us Americans will have to learn to read.

[Ennoea]

The title should be "Why the good in people is ignored?"

[parker pyne]

Because good is boring ^_^

[Jin-E]

Many of the critics would probably seperate between the individuals in the various religious communities and the religious communities themself.

Few people would say Mother Theresa is a bad person, but praising her work among Indias poor doesnt necessarilly mean acceptance of the Catholic Church as an religious organization, whose teachings she was inspired by.


But i agree somewhat. F.example, a religious "awakening" have often helped alcoholics, drug addicts or other people with a troubled past to become productive citizens. So it works both way, not simply ordinary citizens being gradually turned into religious fanatics.

[Xyloxi]

in my opinion i think its becuase of :

The media e.g fox, thesun , sky

Aggressive atheist( attacks other religions and is often intolerant to the follower of other religions)


The bad people who commut the crimes e.g al qaeda, osama , george bush

Political Parties e.g BNP

Ok now.

1. Fox are a bunch of religious nutcases.

2. Religous people are far more aggressive than atheists, and more intolerant.

3. Bush isn't that bad, and he is out of power now.

4. A very small minority who have no chance of getting in.

that was very offensive, just so you know..

What about the rule of comedy? IF its not offensive its not funny?

[ShadowStep]

Sometimes, the religious people are really aggressive compared to atheists. So normal people use them and judge the religion. It's bad really, because these religious people aren't following their religions lol