Quantcast

AC/DC Singer Believes All Religions Are Bad: Do You?

The Big Question 2011/06/04 14:24:04
You!
Add Photos & Videos

Read More: http://www.popeater.com/2011/06/03/brian-johnson-a...

Add a comment above

Top Opinion

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • thє вlu... JohnDeu... 2011/06/05 06:05:11
  • JohnDeu... thє вlu... 2011/06/06 02:23:12
    JohnDeuxTrois95
    any god you believe in.
  • xxTayTayGreenxx 2011/06/05 02:02:55
    No
    xxTayTayGreenxx
    +2
    I dont think that all religions are bad but I dont think you should let your religion get in the way of your life and you shouldnt be treated badly because of your religion.
  • Nikki 2011/06/05 01:59:43
    No
    Nikki
    +2
    not all of them are bad
  • Mr.Hoodz the Truth Troll 2011/06/05 01:50:57
    Yes
    Mr.Hoodz the Truth Troll
    +2
    Most things man made are bad.
  • nightlight Mr.Hood... 2011/06/05 04:10:30 (edited)
    nightlight
    +2
    I chose the "Yes" answer too. But to say that all things man made are bad is to say that man himself is inherently and predominantly evil and that is not true.
  • Mr.Hood... nightlight 2011/06/05 16:43:15
    Mr.Hoodz the Truth Troll
    "Most" Didn't say all things. Man is pretty much evil overall. Look around us. You and I may not be evil but the ones on top make our species look like the devil himself in my opinion.
  • nightlight Mr.Hood... 2011/06/06 22:46:22
    nightlight
    "Most" says enough - or claims too much. There will always be good people and bad people.
  • bluelady 2011/06/05 01:41:07 (edited)
    No
    bluelady
    +2
    I will pray for him pray in my church
  • nightlight bluelady 2011/06/05 04:04:12
    nightlight
    +2
    You will waste your time.
  • bluelady nightlight 2011/06/05 13:21:27
    bluelady
    its never a waste of time to pray for someone
  • nightlight bluelady 2011/06/05 13:57:28
    nightlight
    It's always a waste of time to pray because you are essentially talking to someone who isn't there.
  • Georgia50 2011/06/05 01:38:49
    No
    Georgia50
    +3
    Apparently AC/DC hasn't taken the time to compare the number of people in the rock performing community who checked out of life in a drug-induced haze in contrast to a similar number among the religious.

    And this opinion is supposed to come as a surprise?
  • Caity 2011/06/05 01:35:39
    No
    Caity
    +1
    All of them? No way. Buddhism and Taoism are like the most peaceful religions ever. How could you say they were bad?
  • Yes
    Algor. Mortis. - ҎԊǢɬ Physician
    +1
    All religions have bad things in them
  • nightlight Algor. ... 2011/06/05 04:15:11
    nightlight
    +1
    To say that "All religions have bad things in them" is like saying that there is some evil in crime.
    All religions are systems of beliefs that treat lies as truths, myths as reality and use imaginary rewards and punishments to control and enslave people.
  • Algor. ... nightlight 2011/06/05 04:42:13
    Algor. Mortis. - ҎԊǢɬ Physician
    +1
    That's one way to look at it
  • nightlight Algor. ... 2011/06/05 13:33:12
    nightlight
    That's not just one way of looking at it but a factual statement.
  • KB nightlight 2011/06/05 20:25:11
    KB
    More of an opinion
  • nightlight KB 2011/06/06 22:48:10
    nightlight
    It's my belief and it's based on positive knowledge, so it's not an opinion.
  • Algor. ... nightlight 2011/06/06 04:24:43
    Algor. Mortis. - ҎԊǢɬ Physician
    I guess, if you take religion literally
  • nightlight Algor. ... 2011/06/06 22:50:34
    nightlight
    There's no use in discussing religions unless you look at what the teachings and dogma's of each actually say.
  • MissJo nightlight 2011/06/05 06:29:52
    MissJo
    +1
    Uhm, no...
    Everything has a good side and a bad side, this is life. A more appropiate term would be that there is *some* good in crime.

    There isn't one thing that's going to bring you nothing but good nor one thing that's going to bring you nothing but bad.
  • nightlight MissJo 2011/06/05 13:41:49
    nightlight
    "...there is *some* good in crime."
    Please explain ( I know this is going to be good... )

    "There isn't one thing that's going to bring you nothing but good nor one thing that's going to bring you nothing but bad."
    So please tell me what good could possibly come from a person deciding to rob a bank or commit a rape, or commit a murder?
  • MissJo nightlight 2011/06/05 15:18:54
  • nightlight MissJo 2011/06/05 15:29:29 (edited)
    nightlight
    Sorry to hear about your rape. But there are other, better ways to learn to protect yourself than by being the victim of a rape.

    "Look, good"??

    Though a bank can learn from being robbed, robbing a bank doesn't do the robber any good at all - and it was the criminal I as talking about, not the victim.

    The same thing applies to a murder and when a murder occurs, there is not a survivor but a dead victim - not a stronger or wiser one

    Got anything else to say?
  • MissJo nightlight 2011/06/06 00:29:59
    MissJo
    You're right, there are better ways but it was a lesson for me, all bad things are lessons and should be taken as such.

    And where is the good from the criminal? The adrenaline rush, having a good amount of cash in his hands before Karma hits him like a ton of bricks.

    And when I said surviving victims, I meant the family of the deceased.
  • thє вlu... Algor. ... 2011/06/05 06:05:47
  • JimmyColeman 2011/06/05 01:22:23
    Yes
    JimmyColeman
    +3
    Religion has killed more souls than dictatorial governments ever dreamed of.
  • onabeach JimmyCo... 2011/06/05 03:44:35
    onabeach
    +1
    Have you done an analysis, or are you simply making things up to support your viewpoints. Your assertion is very questionable, because when religion was more powerful, the population was smaller and weapons less powerful.

    For example, Stalin's atrocities killed about 20 million people in a span of decades and Mao 40 million. In contrast, the entire population of 15th century France, Portugal, and Spain combined was about 19 million! So atrocities like the Spanish Inquisition over a span of multiple centuries only killed an estimated 3,000-11,000.

    http://www.fordham.edu/halsal...
    http://users.erols.com/mwhite...
  • nightlight onabeach 2011/06/05 04:20:54 (edited)
    nightlight
    +4
    The only thing that religion had to do with there being smaller and less powerful weapons is that it interfered with the advancement of science.
  • onabeach nightlight 2011/06/05 11:44:45
    onabeach
    The conflict thesis in general lost credence among mainstream historians decades ago, though it still remains popular among laypeople. It was churches funding the universities and teaching people to read (no coincidence that one of the first books Gutenberg printed was a Bible)
  • nightlight onabeach 2011/06/05 13:44:49
    nightlight
    +1
    The idea that conflict is caused by two groups with differing beliefs has not lost credence; it will always stand.
    And the Bible is a work of fiction.
  • socokid onabeach 2011/06/05 10:43:17
    socokid
    And not one of those atrocities were done in order to further atheism.

    Using the doctrine of religion to perform atrocities in order to further your religion is far, far different than ridding your land of religion through force because it presents a power drain on your dictatorial wishes.

    Have you ever studied societies that became atheistic NATURALLY? I have a feeling you would be surprised.

  • onabeach socokid 2011/06/05 11:38:39
    onabeach
    "And not one of those atrocities were done in order to further atheism."

    Actually those numbers do include (though certainly are not limited to) atheists trying to replace religion.

    Under Stalin there was an atheist-advocacy group called the "Society of the Militant Godless" who engaged in "Widespread killings of religious believers"(1). 54,000 Orthodox Parishes before the communists took power were reduced to 500 nationwide by 1940!(2)

    Likewise violence against religion used by Mao's Red Guards, particularly during the Cultural Revolution when his party was destroying the "four olds."

    Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge also used deadly violence to oppose the religious(3). For example, Muslims were forced to eat pork and were killed if they refused.(4)

    1 http://docs.google.com/viewer...
    2 http://countrystudies.us/russ...
    3 Cambodia after the Khmer Rouge: inside the politics of nation building
    By Evan Gottesman (p 62)
    4 The Pol Pot regime: race, power, and genocide in Cambodia under the Khmer
    (p. 274)
    "And not one of those atrocities were done in order to further atheism."

    Actually those numbers do include (though certainly are not limited to) atheists trying to replace religion.

    Under Stalin there was an atheist-advocacy group called the "Society of the Militant Godless" who engaged in "Widespread killings of religious believers"(1). 54,000 Orthodox Parishes before the communists took power were reduced to 500 nationwide by 1940!(2)

    Likewise violence against religion used by Mao's Red Guards, particularly during the Cultural Revolution when his party was destroying the "four olds."

    Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge also used deadly violence to oppose the religious(3). For example, Muslims were forced to eat pork and were killed if they refused.(4)

    1 http://docs.google.com/viewer...
    2 http://countrystudies.us/russ...
    3 Cambodia after the Khmer Rouge: inside the politics of nation building
    By Evan Gottesman (p 62)
    4 The Pol Pot regime: race, power, and genocide in Cambodia under the Khmer
    (p. 274)
    (more)
  • socokid onabeach 2011/06/05 14:54:38
    socokid
    I clearly stated:
    "different than ridding your land of religion through force because it presents a power drain on your dictatorial wishes."

    What part of this argument did you not follow? Religious forces are MASSIVE power drains on a society. A dictator would be very wise (shown throughout history ad nauseum, as you pointed out) to not only rid current religious power by any deeds necessary, but to then also replace it with a new one. Almost universally, the dictator himself becomes the new "God". The similarities to religious dogma within "atheistic" brutal dictatorships are like looking into a mirror.

    And, no comment on the video? It clearly show naturally occurring atheism seems to have the exact opposite effect. We've known this for a long time. Some of the most peaceful nations on planet Earth are atheistic. Go figure...
  • onabeach socokid 2011/06/05 21:11:37 (edited)
    onabeach
    That's just correlational data. In fact, you could use the same correlations in the video to argue for Christian state-religion. Out of the five most peaceful, the current generation of Sweden, Finland, and Denmark have all been raised with state churches. (all but Sweden still have the churches). None of the top violent nations do.

    And it's not fair to compare countries in different continents with different problems. Limited water resources is behind vast amounts of conflicts in Africa, but is barely even a concern in Europe. If you compare countries with similar natural concerns like the UK and Ireland, or Austria and Germany, you will find that the more religious country comes out on top.

    Furthermore this is very biased against powerful countries like Russia, the US, the UK, France, etc as well as countries that have come into conflict with those nations (Afghanistan, Iraq, most of North Africa, etc.)

    And the "peaceful" atheistic nations sat idly by while Serbians murdered Bosnians and so forth, and France who actually gave MILITARY AID to the Tutsi while they massacred the Hutu in Rwanda, outrank Romania, Georgia, and so on this list. This list never pretends to be a proxy for morality, using it as one is a joke.
  • socokid onabeach 2011/06/05 23:03:15
    socokid
    the current generation of Sweden, Finland, and Denmark have all been raised with state churches
    A "State Church" is a declaration on paper. Not much more...

    Sweden: 76% do not believe in a personal God. Until 1996, anyone born to a member of the church was automatically a member as well. = "Church Member" count is severely swayed.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    Finland: 57% do not believe in a personal God.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    Denmark: 58% do not believe in a personal God.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    United States: Only 24% do not believe in a personal God (we are a VERY religious nation).
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    Naturally occurring atheism, or at least the disbelief in dogma and defined Gods like the one in the Bible, seems to correlate with peacefulness. It really, really does. There are clear exceptions, but rare, and the data is too clear to ignore. Dictators happen, and everything they do can be called a crime. But suggesting brutal dictators became that way DUE to atheism, or that their main goal was to simply rid the world of religion, I would still have to call that ridiculous nonsense. Big time.
    the current generation of Sweden, Finland, and Denmark have all been raised with state churches
    A "State Church" is a declaration on paper. Not much more...

    Sweden: 76% do not believe in a personal God. Until 1996, anyone born to a member of the church was automatically a member as well. = "Church Member" count is severely swayed.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    Finland: 57% do not believe in a personal God.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    Denmark: 58% do not believe in a personal God.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    United States: Only 24% do not believe in a personal God (we are a VERY religious nation).
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    Naturally occurring atheism, or at least the disbelief in dogma and defined Gods like the one in the Bible, seems to correlate with peacefulness. It really, really does. There are clear exceptions, but rare, and the data is too clear to ignore. Dictators happen, and everything they do can be called a crime. But suggesting brutal dictators became that way DUE to atheism, or that their main goal was to simply rid the world of religion, I would still have to call that ridiculous nonsense. Big time.
    (more)
  • onabeach socokid 2011/06/06 20:25:45
    onabeach
    "United States: Only 24% do not believe in a personal God (we are a VERY religious nation). "

    Very theistic nation; but religious participation isn't especially high. To quote ReligiousTolerance, "The director of the Center for the Study of Religion at Princeton University, Robert Wuthnow, said that the terrorists' attacks have not changed the basic makeup of the U.S.:

    About one in four of American adults is devoutly religious;
    one in four is secular, and
    the remaining half is mildly interested about religion."
    http://www.religioustolerance...


    When only 3 out of 10 Americans can be bothered to go to church monthly, much less weekly, it seems certain religion is not going to be the strongest influence on them... That would mean most spend almost twice as long watching tv each week than in church each year!

    http://www.csun.edu/science/h...


    In contrast, church-goers make higher proportions of the believers in many countries such as Poland, Ireland, and Italy.

    http://www.eurel.info/EN/inde...

    http://web.archive.org/web/20...
    "United States: Only 24% do not believe in a personal God (we are a VERY religious nation). "

    Very theistic nation; but religious participation isn't especially high. To quote ReligiousTolerance, "The director of the Center for the Study of Religion at Princeton University, Robert Wuthnow, said that the terrorists' attacks have not changed the basic makeup of the U.S.:

    About one in four of American adults is devoutly religious;
    one in four is secular, and
    the remaining half is mildly interested about religion."
    http://www.religioustolerance...


    When only 3 out of 10 Americans can be bothered to go to church monthly, much less weekly, it seems certain religion is not going to be the strongest influence on them... That would mean most spend almost twice as long watching tv each week than in church each year!

    http://www.csun.edu/science/h...


    In contrast, church-goers make higher proportions of the believers in many countries such as Poland, Ireland, and Italy.

    http://www.eurel.info/EN/inde...

    http://web.archive.org/web/20...
    (more)
  • socokid onabeach 2011/06/07 15:29:40
    socokid
    Very theistic nation; but religious participation isn't especially high.
    66% of Americans say that they believed that Jesus Christ will return to earth some day. 44% believe this will happen in their lifetime.

    Only 40% believe in evolution (unreal), almost universally due to this particular theory being an affront to the creation story in their particular flavor of religion book. Namely, the Christian Bible.

    These numbers are staggering when you reflect them against these other nations. That is religious dogma, not general theism.

    When only 3 out of 10 Americans can be bothered to go to church monthly, much less weekly
    Getting off your lazy American but to go to Church is not the problem. It is their BELIEFS.

    Places like Poland, Ireland, and Italy (GPI rank of 11, 20, and 45 respectively) are slight exceptions to the general correlation. As I noted in my first post.

    Remember, this entire thread was about you claiming atheism leads to or breeds dictatorial despotism. This is simply not true. The plethora of other factors that create these monsters are also being ignored. One of which is the use of RELIGION. Whether you worship a God in the sky or the one behind the microphone.

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

Entertainment

2014/11/21 02:35:34

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals