The Crusaders, aren’t they the ones that flew their horses into the towers of Mecca? No, no, they bombed the flying whole house carpet of the Persian king killing 300+ innocent people, no, that’s not it. Did they enslave the southern 1/2 of Spain and kill all the Christians and Jews they could? I don’t think so. Maybe they were the Barbary Pirates, nah, that as those other guys, too. As are the pirates of East Africa, the guys that threw the man in the wheel chair off the Aquille Lauro. No, history isn’t kind to the Crusaders, but they pale by comparison the record of the Muslims.
Riding your favorite hobby horse again, CK? As with so many other things in life, evil people make for evil religion, and good people make for good religion..The primary purpose of religion is to help an individual understand his own true nature and purpose, and his true relationship with other people and external reality in general. This in itself is neither good nor evil, but it comes in handy for living a sensible and positive life..A secondary purpose of religion, which is what you’re getting at, is to organize and focus the activities of people with common values and beliefs. (In that view, a lot of things that wouldn’t call themselves “religions” actually are — ethnic identities, political parties, ideologies, etc.) This, in fact, can be used for great good or great evil…but the good or evil is a reflection of the people that comprise it, and the leaders they allow to dominate it..To make a sweeping remark like “all religion is evil” is to miss the point, and take the blame for evil in the world away from where it really belongs — the pride, greed, cruelty, and stupidity that each of us has in us, and each of us struggles to housebreak into something like civilized behavior.
@Clark Kent : I think you need to go back and re-examine your logic..First, correlation does not mean causation. Yes, the Bible (and the Koran, and the Bagavad-Gita, and just about every other religious text) include descriptions of violence and cruelty. So do history books, Shakespeare’s plays, and most great novels. Are they also therefore evil? Could we eliminate violence and cruelty from the world by burning all the books and erasing all the histories? I somehow doubt it..Second, there is contrary evidence to the claim that religion somehow causes violence and cruelty. Joe Stalin killed more people than Adolf Hitler; Mao killed more than Stalin, yet both were devotees of “scientific, atheistic Communism.” It would appear that whatever evil is manifest in our species cuts across all religions, including the religion of unbelief..Third, while nearly all sacred writings depict the violence and cruelty that is inherent to our species, these writings also depict this tendency as a flaw (e.g, “original sin”), an inherent broken-ness in our nature that we ourselves cannot cure. And, after identifying this flaw, the sacred writings of all faiths go on to express the hope for a supernatural remedy (as we have already demonstrated we cannot find a remedy on our own). And they contain advice (said to be divinely revealed) which, if we took it seriously, would significantly reduce if not fully eliminate the violence and cruelty in the world..So I respectfully suggest that when you claim religion causes violence and cruelty because it depicts these things, your argument is analogous to claiming that medical journals cause disease by reporting on it and discussing ways in which it might be treated.
This is not just a comic strip blog — it is not something to be read, laughed at and dismissed. Sometimes it is enlightening. Something to be read and studied. Thank you to puddleglum1066, and SCAATY_423. As BAILY wrote, “Nicely done. Very.”. 5 stars to you both. — Douglas
I think agnostics on average are better people than average religious people. Agnostics tend to be more tolerant; they question whether actions are good and fair and decent; they don’t find themselves doing unkind things because some book prescribes those things.
Funny how agnostics and atheists become praying Christians in the foxhole and on their deathbeds. I guess in the back of their minds they always knew they were wrong.
adubman almost 13 years ago
Must live in Tombstone, AZ
GROG Premium Member almost 13 years ago
One man’s blood thirsty is another man’s raptor.
Good Morning, Fellow Cave Dwellers.
ransomdstone almost 13 years ago
An carnivorus elephant with two legs?
toppop52 almost 13 years ago
The Crusaders, aren’t they the ones that flew their horses into the towers of Mecca? No, no, they bombed the flying whole house carpet of the Persian king killing 300+ innocent people, no, that’s not it. Did they enslave the southern 1/2 of Spain and kill all the Christians and Jews they could? I don’t think so. Maybe they were the Barbary Pirates, nah, that as those other guys, too. As are the pirates of East Africa, the guys that threw the man in the wheel chair off the Aquille Lauro. No, history isn’t kind to the Crusaders, but they pale by comparison the record of the Muslims.
PShaw0423 almost 13 years ago
Riding your favorite hobby horse again, CK? As with so many other things in life, evil people make for evil religion, and good people make for good religion..The primary purpose of religion is to help an individual understand his own true nature and purpose, and his true relationship with other people and external reality in general. This in itself is neither good nor evil, but it comes in handy for living a sensible and positive life..A secondary purpose of religion, which is what you’re getting at, is to organize and focus the activities of people with common values and beliefs. (In that view, a lot of things that wouldn’t call themselves “religions” actually are — ethnic identities, political parties, ideologies, etc.) This, in fact, can be used for great good or great evil…but the good or evil is a reflection of the people that comprise it, and the leaders they allow to dominate it..To make a sweeping remark like “all religion is evil” is to miss the point, and take the blame for evil in the world away from where it really belongs — the pride, greed, cruelty, and stupidity that each of us has in us, and each of us struggles to housebreak into something like civilized behavior.
NE1956 almost 13 years ago
Not if you have to kill it to get it.
puddleglum1066 almost 13 years ago
@Clark Kent : I think you need to go back and re-examine your logic..First, correlation does not mean causation. Yes, the Bible (and the Koran, and the Bagavad-Gita, and just about every other religious text) include descriptions of violence and cruelty. So do history books, Shakespeare’s plays, and most great novels. Are they also therefore evil? Could we eliminate violence and cruelty from the world by burning all the books and erasing all the histories? I somehow doubt it..Second, there is contrary evidence to the claim that religion somehow causes violence and cruelty. Joe Stalin killed more people than Adolf Hitler; Mao killed more than Stalin, yet both were devotees of “scientific, atheistic Communism.” It would appear that whatever evil is manifest in our species cuts across all religions, including the religion of unbelief..Third, while nearly all sacred writings depict the violence and cruelty that is inherent to our species, these writings also depict this tendency as a flaw (e.g, “original sin”), an inherent broken-ness in our nature that we ourselves cannot cure. And, after identifying this flaw, the sacred writings of all faiths go on to express the hope for a supernatural remedy (as we have already demonstrated we cannot find a remedy on our own). And they contain advice (said to be divinely revealed) which, if we took it seriously, would significantly reduce if not fully eliminate the violence and cruelty in the world..So I respectfully suggest that when you claim religion causes violence and cruelty because it depicts these things, your argument is analogous to claiming that medical journals cause disease by reporting on it and discussing ways in which it might be treated.
Neanderthal almost 13 years ago
Get fries with that.
Woody157 almost 13 years ago
This is not just a comic strip blog — it is not something to be read, laughed at and dismissed. Sometimes it is enlightening. Something to be read and studied. Thank you to puddleglum1066, and SCAATY_423. As BAILY wrote, “Nicely done. Very.”. 5 stars to you both. — Douglas
Hunter7 almost 13 years ago
Our shelled friend should be thankful his home left a foul taste in the mout of the raptor rather than a fowl taste.
Neanderthal almost 13 years ago
Yeah Dogsniff. That literary form is alot of compensation, but it’s a royal weekend. Scotty – O.
Thanks, BC’ers.
hariseldon59 almost 13 years ago
Is this the first time that the raptors have actually spoken in the strip? I don’t recall it happening before.
PRASHANTSRIVASTAV716 almost 13 years ago
lol.. the raptor’s flair in Language..
ghretighoti almost 13 years ago
I think agnostics on average are better people than average religious people. Agnostics tend to be more tolerant; they question whether actions are good and fair and decent; they don’t find themselves doing unkind things because some book prescribes those things.
toppop52 almost 13 years ago
Funny how agnostics and atheists become praying Christians in the foxhole and on their deathbeds. I guess in the back of their minds they always knew they were wrong.