While the world's religions have inspired stunning acts of creation, they also have been implicated in some of the darkest deeds in human history.
If God cannot be blamed for such moments of evil, His priests and prophets at least have a case to answer.
So what might they say? That religion is unfairly blamed -- and that we should look to other factors? Admit that there are problems but argue that on balance the good outweighs the bad? That there is no alternative; that people need religion like they need air?- Intelligence Squared
Bio
Richard Ackland
Richard Ackland is a prominent columnist for The Sydney Morning Herald writing on legal and ethical issues.
He is founder of Law Press of Australia, whose publications include The Justinian and The Gazette of Law and Journalism. Ackland has been a staunch advocate of free speech and was co-winner of the prestigious Gold Walkley for Journalism in 1999 following work as writer and presenter of the ABC's Media Watch program.
Ackland has also presented ABC Radio National's breakfast program, covering a range of issues and controversies. In 2000 he was awarded the Voltaire Prize for Free Speech.
Lyn Allison
Lyn Allison was an Australian Democrat Senator from 1996 to 2008. Lyn Allison has been a prominent advocate for women's issues, and human rights.
She served on the Senate Environment and Information Technology Committeee, and the Select Committees inquiring into gambling and Health. Following a study tour to Lebanon, Allison introduced legislation intro Parliament which would prevent Australia from using cluster bombs. Allison is the former Director of the Employment and Economic Development Corporation in Melbourne and a Councillor for the Port Melbopurne City Council.
Earlier this year she was named Humanist of the Year, for her commitment to the democratic process and support for the secular nature of Australian society.
Dr. John Lennox
Dr John Lennox holds three doctorates in the fields of science and mathematics and is a Fellow in Mathematics and Philosophy of Science at Green College, University of Oxford.
His most recent book is God's Undertaker: Has Science Buried God?. Lennox also holds a degree in bioethics and has lectured extensively in Europe, both Western and Eastern, including many visits to Russia as a guest of the Academy of Science. A popular Christian apologist and scientist, he travels widely speaking on the interface between science and religion.
Like Dawkins, he has dedicated his career to science, but he has arrived at very different conclusions. "It is the very nature of science that leads me to belief in God," he says.
Simon Longstaff
Dr Simon Longstaff is Executive Director of St James Ethics Centre. Simon spent five years studying and working as a member of Magdalene College, Cambridge. Having won scholarships to study at Cambridge, he read for the degrees of Master of Philosophy and Doctor of Philosophy. He was inaugural President of The Australian Association for Professional and Applied Ethics and is a Director of a number of companies. He is a Fellow of the World Economic Forum and a member of the International Advisory Committee of the Foreign Policy Association, based in New York.
Ian Plimer
Ian Plimer is Emeritus Professor of Earth Sciences at the University of Melbourne and Professor of mining geology at the University of Adelaide.
He is a prominent critic of creationism, and is famous for a debate with creationist Duane Gish in which he asked his opponent to hold live electrical cables to prove that electromagnetism was 'only a theory'. He has published over 120 academic papers and six popular books. He is also a prominent member of the Australian Skeptics.
In 2004 he was awarded the Calrk Medal by the Rioyal Society of NSW. In the late 1990s, Plimer was involved in legal proceedings concerning the location of Noah's Ark, in which Plimer was ultimately unsuccessful. His most recent book, Telling Lies For God, has a forward by Archbishop Peter Hollingsworth. Professor Plimer argues that religion is important for the fabric of society.
Suzanne Rutland
Suzanne Rutland is Associate Professor and Chair of the Department of Hebrew, Biblical & Jewish Studies at the University of Sydney and the main lecturer in the program of Jewish Civilization, Thought and Cultures.
She has published widely on Australian Jewish history, edits the Sydney edition of the AJHS Journal, as well as writing on issues relating to the Shoah and Israel. Her latest books are The Jews in Australia and Triumph of the Jewish Spirit: Forty Years of the Jewish Communal Appeal. In January 2008 she received the Medal of the Order of Australia from the Australian Government for services to Higher Jewish Education and interfaith dialogue.
Vic Stenger
Professor Vic Stenger is emeritus Professor of Physics and Astronomy at the University of Hawaii and adjunct Professor of Philosophy at the University of Colorado. Stenger spent forty years doing basic research in elementary particle physics and astrophysics before retiring in 2000 and moving to Colorado. He is the author of seven books that deal with the interface between science, pseudoscience, and religion including: The Comprehensible Cosmos and God: The Failed Hypothesis - How Science Shows that God Does Not Exist. The last title was on the New York Times bestseller list in 2007. Stenger maintains that plausible natural explanations exist for for all observable phenomena and there is strong scientific evidence against anything mystical or supernatural in the universe.
Relation of human beings to God or the gods or to whatever they consider sacred or, in some cases, merely supernatural. Archaeological evidence suggests that religious beliefs have existed since the first human communities. They are generally shared by a community, and they express the communal culture and values through myth, doctrine, and ritual. Worship is probably the most basic element of religion, but moral conduct, right belief, and participation in religious institutions also constitute elements of the religious life. Religions attempt to answer basic questions intrinsic to the human condition (Why do we suffer? Why is there evil in the world? What happens to us when we die?) through the relationship to the sacred or supernatural or (e.g., in the case of Buddhism) through perception of the true nature of reality. Broadly speaking, some religions (e.g., Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) are outwardly focused, and others (e.g., Jainism, Buddhism) are inwardly focused.
I clicked on the clip of the guy spouting that environmentalism is the new religion (part 6) and felt I had to comment, so I registered only to that end.
I am almost amazed they allowed him to continue flapping his gums after he claimed that "[Environmentalism is] terrified of doubt, terrified of skepticism [...] with a fear of nature," that "logic, concrete data and questioning: they aren't permitted. Heretics like [him] are inquisitorially destroyed (I about fell out of my seat when I heard that line)" and last but not least that this new religion "tries to re-mystify the world; a world that its adherents neither experience nor do they try to understand."
I half expected to hear a siren start blaring and that guy from "Showtime At The Apollo" to start tap dancing his way on to the dais, shooing this guy offstage.
What a colossal misunderstanding of both religion and science. He should be outright ashamed of this clip, and should fire his staff for not proofreading that drivel. It makes me sad that this level of ignorance is still running amok in this day and age.
The bible doesn't just dispassionately record genocide, it tells you how you are expected to behave when you commit genocide. In modern language: you're supposed to kill all the men, all the boys and all the wives; keep the virgins alive so you can rape them.
Name one atrocity committed in the name of atheism. And no, communism does not count; not all atheists are communists, nor vice versa. The grand religious atrocities you mentioned were done in the name of religion, a direct result of people's belief in the faith you cling to. If you're going to say that every evil ever done by someone you assert was an atheist counts as being caused by atheism, then I get to lay claim to every death from every war ever started by a theist. Would you take that bet? I think the odds are in my favor on that score.
Moreover, to suggest that Hussein was an atheist is dubious at best, although not as bad as claiming that he had an "atheist regime" in a society full of devout Muslims. Especially since he was regularly documented observing religious customs (e.g. praying towards Mecca). But I suppose believing something is better than knowing something, isn't it? Also very telling that you left out Hitler, whose Catholicism (read Mein Kampf if you don't believe me) did nothing to prevent him from slaughtering Jews and being an instigator in WWII, which killed over 70 million people. Or that while atheists make up 10-15% of most civilized countries, they make up less than 1% of the prison population in those same states. Of course with all the stonings, inquisitions, and murders committed against non-believers over the centuries, it's hard to tally up exactly how many individuals were murdered for not believing in the stories of religion. One thing's for certain: a person is much more likely to be murdered for not believing than believing.
Regarding science: we think it's the best thing we've discovered for uncovering the truth. We do not think we have all the answers. We hope science can provide the answers we need, if our species lives long enough to puzzle it all out. But it is the theist who believes without evidence. The scientist says "this is our best guess," knowing full well that as evidence comes in, their position may well be refuted. This is the key difference: what is accepted as true in science is always changing, a humbling process by which we come to see knowledge as a process. With religion, what was true before is true now, and we must continually twist and contort the facts to support our beliefs. And please, you clearly know nothing about Darwin or what he taught, so do us all a favor and stop spouting creationist talking points. You're only embarrassing yourself.
Most amusing was your assertion that people don't even read Darwin's work, but use it like a secular Bible. From my experience that's how the Christian Bible is most often used - pound your fist on it, swear on it, yell about how important it is. But whatever you do, don't actually read it! You might have to start answering uncomfortable questions. Like why god never condemns slavery...
frankie, if the only reason why you do good things is because you fear the wrath of a deity then you're not a good person. But don't cast that aspersion on me!
I'm an atheist. I don't do the right thing because I fear punishment or expect reward. I do the right thing for its own sake. I do the right thing because I want to live in a just, compassionate society. And frankly, I'm tired of every whackjob on the planet yammering about how there can be no morality without believing the same unprovable things they do. Get over yourselves please.
Here's an idea: take the time you spend defaming our character online, and do something constructive. In these tough times there are lots of people out there who could use a helping hand. Right now all you're doing is making the short time we have on this planet that much less pleasant with your hateful, baseless claims. Really, why are religious zealots like you so full of hatred? It makes no sense whatsoever.
That speaker is not only a joke... His words are almost criminal. He doesn't seem to understand (or voluntarily discards) that science works with evidence, demonstration, and starts from the facts in order to build a theory. Hence the theory of gravity, which itself is still a work in progress.
Scientists are humble in their findings and hypotheses while religious fundamentalists boast about. Obviously the P.R. aspect of this is in favor of the least virtuous, which is a shame. Global Warming is not a theory anymore and is acknowledged by all the most reputable academies of science like AAAS or NAS. Rumoring that they are wrong is based on no solid ground (since THEY are the authority) and is equivalent to rumoring that the tenants of the Gravity theory are wrong (since they're basically the same body).
Sorry, but it's the THEORY of Evolution. I think you need to read The Orign of Species, cover to cover - something that I know almost no one has done but so many use it as some type of secular Bible. Darwin lived at a time when there was no knowledge of molecules, atoms, cells, quantum mechanics, DNA or many of the scientific discoveries we all rely on as truth today in understanding our world.
Darwin suggested that all life came to be by complete, random accident. If the creature resulting from this accident or series of accidents was "the fittest," it would survive, passing on positive traits to its offspring. The fact that a parent has a trait does not mean that it will be passed on every generation. All of this may be true, but the fossil record is not comprehensive or convincing enough to prove anything. This also ignores the fact that mankind, through deliberate action, stifles the evolution of species in that we deliberately have prevented many weak species from going extinct, as well as causing many strong species to become extinct. To believe that all life from the most simple single cell organism to the most complex of all creatures is the result of accidents is simply not believable to me. There is no proof of it. It is a leap of faith to believe it. A local street fair where I live had a booth where a Rabbi answered questions - he called his booth, "Ask the Rabbi." I asked his opinion of Darwinism/Theory of Evolution. He said the book fascinated him and it was an important book everyone should read, just as all should read the Torah and many other great books. When I asked him did he believe all of life came about by accident, he gave me an excellent response I remember today. Rabbi said, "If I told you that the Mona Lisa was a result of an explosion at a paint and canvas factory, or if David was the result of a landslide, would you believe me?" To believe that a Creator started all of this is far more likely an explanation that a random series of accidents, which, many of which MUST have occurred precisely in the manner they did, or life would not exist at all.
Explain gravity using Darwinian theories. What about the Laws of Thermodynamics? Tell me, sqirril, what specific species have you observed evolving?
The atheist regimes I mentioned, naturally did not kill in the name of non-belief per se, but I contend that their non-belief placed no moral, legal or ethical boundaries between their philosphical and political beliefs and their behavior. Stalin himself, when asked, "Must a Communist be an atheist?" responded, "Yes." It was part and parcel of his philosphy about human nature and how humans should be treated. Religion and its traditions, rituals and the restraining effect of their rules and the "Fear of God," or the expectation of cosmic justice at judgement, are strong influences on the lives of believers. Do believers fail and still commit horriffic acts? Yes they do, because human nature is fixed, fallen and imperfectable. There are some among us who cannot constrain our drives and instincts and we behave in ways not in keeping with a law abiding, cooperative life with our fellow humans. You cannot simply absolve your atheist tradition and its history, or your continuing of the atheist tradition in your own life, simply by disagreeing with me. Your non arguement using correllations rather than causative factors and implying I did the same when detailing the horrors of your atheist forefathers does not fly.
The 10 Commandments are stupid? Did you get that little nugget of wisdom from Darwin as well? The 10 Commandments, whether from God Almighty or from the deliberate planning of a group of wanderers in the Desert to maintain order, are the basis of Western Civilization. Many of the most brilliant minds, including scientific minds, recognize the timeless relevance and profound power these Commandments have in shaping the history of mankind. Are they not examples of an evolutionary process as well? Would you rather live in a society that did its best to make these a part of their legal framework or one that did not?
Atheists are entertaining, with their smug assumptions and insults of my Faith. They cannot prove their own assertions, so must resort to ad hominem attacks and they ignore the blood stained history of their own belief system. I do not let that go unanswered when I see it. I do not let any lies go unanswered when I hear them.
The reason why we believe strongly in Evolution is because it does not require any faith what so ever. It is all evidence, logical and proven without a doubt that Evolution occurs. We have even observed it.
Life on the backs of crystals was an old idea, and it was only in the hypothesis stage.
The so called 'atheist murderers' didn't kill in the name of their 'non-belief'. That is obsurd. (I'm tired and using other people's debunkings with modification) All people with mustaches must confess to the EVILS IN THE IR MUSTACHERY HISTORY! All of those people who don't collect stamps have to confess to the wrongs they have done in the world, they are horrible horrible people. Did you know 99.99% of all murderers WERE NON STAMP COLLECTORS? :| Also Saddam was a Muslim...
The reason why you can't find someone to follow the ten commandments faithfully throughout their lives is because they are dumb.
I can only answer for myself. My life would be greatly diminshed without my Religious Faith. All of the sensory thrills of human existence have never been enough for me to find meaning in life. I believe in Providence. I believe the moral underpinnings of the Judeo/Christian heritage that shaped the West is essential for its continued existence. My Faith is based on the way I was raised and by the experiences I have had in my life. The Ten Commandments are far more profound, important and difficult to follow than most of us will admit to ourselves. In fact, I have never known a single human being who has followed all of them faithfully throughout his life.
Most atheists see science as able to explain everything in life. This is just as big a leap of Faith as my belief in the God of the Old Testament and Jesus Christ of the New Testament. The real truth is that atheists will never admit that they take science's accidents and findings on faith. Daniel Dennet, a noted atheist and college professor says that life came to earth on the backs of crystals. This is a leap of faith. I say God created the Universe. This is a leap of Faith. We are both talking leaps of faith. He sees his as rational and intelligent and he sees mine as silly. He truly understands no more than I do.
I do know one thing from history - In my lifetime, the most horrific violence man has ever committed against his fellow man has been perpetrated by atheist regimes - Stalinism, Maoism, Communism, Pol Pot, Saddam Hussein. The Crusades, the Inquisition and the Salem Witch trials, often used as "gotchas" by atheists to prove how bad religion is, pale in comparison to the 100+ Million Innocent Souls slaughtered in the name of human intellect and human nature. If I profess to be a Christian, I must admit and work to right the wrongs committed in its name. If you profess to be an atheist, you cannot deny the blood stained heritage you are carrying into the future.
member. 
