That man Dawkins

It makes biological sense to help others in your group if you are a member of a social species. Co-operating groups simply survive better and work better if the animals belonging to them follow certain basic rules.

Which means that individuals survive better (and are happier?) too. Which is what life is all about.

Petallus I like your open mindedness and respect for the work done by some Christians. I think there are probably many branches of Christianity which have no record of abuse, hatred or misery. Which don't ban family planning or homosexuals etc. Also other non Christian religions. Ghandi had a deep faith and I don't think anyone would say he had any bad motives for his work. He started as a lawyer, not a particularly spiritual job, but became the leader he was because of his life experiences. Some atheists do it the other way round.

Good works are not just the works of religious people, there are good and bad in all walks of life. Just as bad things are in all works of life and not just by some who call themselves Christians/Muslims/whatever. I don't have a problem with anyone's beliefs, I was brought up in a home with a strong atheist and a deeply spritual Christian so can see both points of view.

It is interesting though that when a Christian/Muslim/whatever does something wicked we all hear about their beliefs but when someone who is not known to have a faith does something wicked we never hear that they were agnostic/atheist/humanist although everyone must be something. Perhaps this distorts our perception of people who profess to have a faith?

My problem is with people who purport to do something bad because of their faith but I am not aware that any religion teaches us to hurt others, it is just some fanatics interpretation of their relgion.
.
I don't think the Roman Catholic priests who hurt children did it in the name of their faith though.

Please don't assume anything about my faith or lack of it from this it is just a point of view, no more or less.

Thank you for your point of view. Mostly I agree with it, but I do "have a problem" with the beliefs of those nut jobs who are causing so much horror at the moment because they think their prophet has been insulted. Even being insulted doesn't warrant terrorism. Yes, I have a big problem with the kind of belief that makes people behave like that. It may or may not be a religious belief (they seem to think it is), but it's a belief I have a problem with.

Not all beliefs are worthy of respect. Some beliefs are diabolical.

Gagagran - do you think remote tribes that have not had the 'benefit' of the Christian/Judeo system are incapable of moral behaviour?
As Bags so eloquently says, if man were not more capable of cooperation than conflict, we would never have evolved as we have. We are pack animals, and any member of the pack who strays too far from the norm will be ejected - and in the wild that usually meant death.
I think it is rather arrogant to assume that there is only one way of becoming altruistic.
I really don't see the point of these 'Christians do good things' arguments - nobody has ever even hinted that they don't. I don't recall seeing the religous beliefs of most murderers mentioned in newspaper reports.

Movedalot - I can't understand what you mean by 'Some atheists do it the other way round'. Do what? Stop being spiritual and become lawyers? That is a bit judgemental about lawyers, isn't it?

No Greatnan it was about Ghandi not lawyers! He became religious later in life, some atheists start as Christians and become atheists later in life.

Do I need to explain 'later in life'? I simply mean it hit him when he was a full adult.

There was an interesting interview with Salmon Rushdie on radio4 last night he spoke about the horror of the fatwa. And this was set up by a spiritual leader, not an uneducated 'nut job'.

Different cultures, different ideas about blasphemy and punishment etc.

Was this latest 'insult' a deliberate provocation do you think?

Incidentally, it wasn't that long ago in our own culture that people were horribly tortured and killed if found guilty of blasphemy.

I wonder whether in all societies there are people who are prepared to go to rabid extremes whether it be forming a lynch mob, murdering people because of their sexuality or blowing up others just because they have different beliefs, and all the while convinced they are behaving righteously.

I can't agree that no religion advocates violence - I have read the Old Testament. And there appears to be plenty of incitement to kill apostates in Islam.

I think this thread is leading us back to Weinberg. He said something like:

Good people tend to do good things.
Bad people tend to do bad things.
But for good people to do bad things - that takes religion.

Don't let's venture down the 'murderers with Christian beliefs' road, Greatnan! I've lost count of the number of born again Christian lifers I came across in my work. Always coincided with the parole applcation process! Me??? Cynical???

Greatnan I was commenting about western concepts of goodness and morality and the fact that our laws are based on that. It stems from judeo-christianity and of course other belief systems have their own concept of morality. I don't believe there is only one form of altruism and did not say that.

Bags what's your evidence for your statement about fewer agnostics and atheists in prison? Where? Seems very dubious to me, given the number of people who are "assigned" to an appropriate religion by bureaucracy. Also there might be other reasons for claiming to be of a particular faith.

I'm off, nit-picking has started again.

I will look up the reference, lily. I know what you mean about people being assigned to certain religions, though. There's also the problem of whether proper questions are asked, e.g. it was only at the last census in The UK that you could actually say that you had no religion. Many people who were baptised put down the religion/church they were baptised in or brought up in, without it really meaning anything about what they believe.

moved, it's always worth picking nits. Saves a lot of trouble later on as it prevents them hatching and laying yet more nits.

When did putting forward a point of view become nit-picking? If you choose to join in a discussion like this you can't complain if it doesn't go your way.
We are, after all, intelligent, mature adults.

It's true that religious beliefs outweigh atheism and agnosticism when stated affiliations are recorded on admission to prison, but these stats are not helpful in any way. Those with no wish to 'worship' stay in their cells in most prisons, whilst anyone who wants to attend a service gets out of their cell to socialise. Muslims tend to ask for privacy and a prayer mat so they can pray in their cells, so they have no need to make false claims. Prison officers often tip prisoners off - 'see the chaplain, attend services.' Not because they want the prisoner to convert, but because it gets them off the wing and under someone else's responsibility for an hour or so!

No one has researched what level of church attendance is maintained after release from prison, but anecdotally it's practically nil.

When I went into hospital to have a baby, I was asked my religion and said 'None'. 'Oh, we'll put you down as C of E' said the clerk. Needless to say, she did NOT.

A reference to religion and prison populations. This one refers to the US. If you do a google of the terms "religion and prison population" there are various other threads to follow. I'll have to ask MOG, who first told me this yonks ago, where his reference was from, when he gets home.

The last para says it all bags - 'jailhouse religion.'

Thanks, Bags. Interesting but not conclusive, I think. Differences between UK population and US in terms of religiosity makes it questionable whether it applies universally. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the inmates of a Saudi jail were almost 100% Moslem but I don't think it would tell me much about the personal belief systems of Saudi convicts. Whenim I read somewhere that there is an incentive for people to identify as Moslem in jail because of the pressure and/or advantages to be gained from other prisoners. Does this ring a bell?

My brother was a devout Catholic in the army - he liked the fact that they were excused Church services on Sundays. And, of course, we all know how many converts Christianity has gained since school entry became dependent on parents' religion.

Lilygran I haven't heard that one. I think the advantages cancel out the disadvantages. All prisons provide halal meat, allow time for prayer, and will find places for prayer if cells have to be shared. Muslims who stay in their cells to pray may have to stay there until officers can return to unlock the wing for association, leaving only a couple of officers on duty, when other officers are busy doing escorts through the prison or attending review meetings. 15 minutes of prayer, but locked up for 2 unnecessary hours - doesn't sound like an advantage to me.

I vaguely remember studies of moral development where some psychologist or other came up with a hierarchy where following rules laid down by others was near the bottom and working it all out for yourself was near the top.

I don't know what this says about religion and morality but anyway don't shoot me, I'm only the messenger.

Also, Lilygran if you look at prisoners in general, they will weigh up what will give them the best circumstances, as anyone would, and you would be surprised how many suddenly discover they have gone deaf (so can ignore officers), got a serious illness (that's a morning on the hospital wing), want compassionate leave (parent, sibling or offspring has died, not that they ever felt the need to find them on the outside), want to learn to cook (extra rations in the kitchen), want a cleaning job (go-between for passing on drugs) and so on. It's too complex to be able to sort in terms of religion, personal safety or motivation to change for the better. Each prisoner has to be carefully assessed to determine whether their needs are genuine, with prison officers assuming they aren't and probation officers assuming they are until they know differently.