Hehre Pläne...
*warning* The following post contains criticism of religion (not by me, but who cares)
Me: Hmm; I'd really like to meet some fellow non-believers... I wonder where this year's Global Atheist Convention will be held...*googles* ...Okay. Australia might be a little too far away... How about Europe? *googles* "European Atheist Convention - in Cologne, Germany" Yes! Oh and look at the guest list! There's Michael Schmidt-Salomon (*___*) and Philipp Möller (I've translated one of his speeches behind the cut). And my favourite blogger!!! This is going to be incredible!
I've got a translation exam coming up, so this was totally practice and not excessive fangirling.
Dispute Berlin
(this is how arguments are done)
the topic: The world would be a better place without religion.
The educationist Philipp Möller - he says: You can have charity without the bible.
Well, I hope you’ll forgive my youthful flippancy, Mr. Matussek [one of the other speakers], if I start off by saying: "Gullibility is the obstruction of wisdom“ (lit. he who is more ready to believe will have to struggle harder to become clever)
I would also like to tell you why I’m standing here tonight with very mixed feelings: it’s because the job of criticising religion is very easy on the one hand, but on the other hand it’s also damn difficult.
It’s easy, because it’s simply absurd to believe in a god, just because you can’t proof his non-existence. Because the same could be said of the tooth fairy - and no grown-up believes in the tooth fairy.
It’s also an easy job because we can observe throughout the world, in past and present, that religion divides humans into "We are the good ones and we are right“ and "You are the evil ones and you are wrong.“ and this is how wars are started - or at least abetted.
The job’s also easy, because we have several great original thinkers, be it Epicurus, be it Darwin, be it Marx, be it Nietzsche, Feuerbach, Kant and so on, I could give you many names. And recently the critics of religion did not even need to do anything at all, if you think of the [reactions to the] systematic cover-ups of the massive abuse cases in clerical institutions.
Yet the job is difficult, because we use government funds to pay for people like Mr. Huber [another speaker] to be trained in rhetorics - it’s called studying theology.
It’s a difficult job, because once they have been successfully indoctrinated, people often immunize themselves against criticism and worst of all, feel personally insulted sometimes - some of you might be experiencing this right now.
It’s also a difficult job, because politicians want us to believe that we are savouring the values of the "Christian Western World“ (literal: Christian Occident), even though we had to fight [the church] hard for democracy, human rights, freedom of opinion, freedom of press and equal rights.
And the legend of the Caritas [a charity] 'applause' That’s nice of you, but you’re taking up my time.
The Caritas-myth leads even people who are not really connected to the church to believe that the Churches are doing oh-so-much good, yet only 1.8 percent of the Caritas and the Diakonie [another charity] are financed by the church; the rest is government-funded. Pretty cheap advertising.
But as difficult as the job of criticising religion might be, one thing should be clear: it’s absolutely necessary that we do it.
Because as long as religious groups believe themselves to hold absolute truths; as long as German dioceses are almost completely funded with taxes, not church taxes, but our taxes, yet are controlled by the undemocratic Vatican; as long as we pay "professional christians“ for calling homosexuality an unnatural sin; and as long as we dismiss the much-needed criticism of islam as "islamophobic“ and "racist“, we can and must criticise religion.
Finally, let me tell you that we - just like the critics of nuclear energy - offer alternatives, of course. And those alternatives are "enlightenment“ (/Aufklärung) and "humanism“ with their three pillars: Science, to find out more about our world, Philosophy, to interpret those findings, and Art, to fulfill humanities desire for creativity and love of life.
We want religion to be a private affair, religiousness to be a private affair, we want religion separated from the state politically, legally, and most important: financially.
We are for ethics that respect humans, and by the way, all other animals, instead of "godly morals“; we prefer the Here and Now over the Hereafter, "Heidenspaß“ (huge fun, lit. a heathen’s fun) over "Höllenqual“ (agony, lit. hell’s torment), "For“- 'applause' I’d like to get this lovely quote off my mind; "For we who can split atoms“, says Michael Schmidt-Salomon, "and communicate via satellites, must possess the necessary emotional and intellectual maturity, and a two thousand years old mythology that was devised by a primitive herder culture will not help us with that." Thank you.
*___*
Me: Hmm; I'd really like to meet some fellow non-believers... I wonder where this year's Global Atheist Convention will be held...*googles* ...Okay. Australia might be a little too far away... How about Europe? *googles* "European Atheist Convention - in Cologne, Germany" Yes! Oh and look at the guest list! There's Michael Schmidt-Salomon (*___*) and Philipp Möller (I've translated one of his speeches behind the cut). And my favourite blogger!!! This is going to be incredible!
I've got a translation exam coming up, so this was totally practice and not excessive fangirling.
Click to viewDispute Berlin
(this is how arguments are done)
the topic: The world would be a better place without religion.
The educationist Philipp Möller - he says: You can have charity without the bible.
Well, I hope you’ll forgive my youthful flippancy, Mr. Matussek [one of the other speakers], if I start off by saying: "Gullibility is the obstruction of wisdom“ (lit. he who is more ready to believe will have to struggle harder to become clever)
I would also like to tell you why I’m standing here tonight with very mixed feelings: it’s because the job of criticising religion is very easy on the one hand, but on the other hand it’s also damn difficult.
It’s easy, because it’s simply absurd to believe in a god, just because you can’t proof his non-existence. Because the same could be said of the tooth fairy - and no grown-up believes in the tooth fairy.
It’s also an easy job because we can observe throughout the world, in past and present, that religion divides humans into "We are the good ones and we are right“ and "You are the evil ones and you are wrong.“ and this is how wars are started - or at least abetted.
The job’s also easy, because we have several great original thinkers, be it Epicurus, be it Darwin, be it Marx, be it Nietzsche, Feuerbach, Kant and so on, I could give you many names. And recently the critics of religion did not even need to do anything at all, if you think of the [reactions to the] systematic cover-ups of the massive abuse cases in clerical institutions.
Yet the job is difficult, because we use government funds to pay for people like Mr. Huber [another speaker] to be trained in rhetorics - it’s called studying theology.
It’s a difficult job, because once they have been successfully indoctrinated, people often immunize themselves against criticism and worst of all, feel personally insulted sometimes - some of you might be experiencing this right now.
It’s also a difficult job, because politicians want us to believe that we are savouring the values of the "Christian Western World“ (literal: Christian Occident), even though we had to fight [the church] hard for democracy, human rights, freedom of opinion, freedom of press and equal rights.
And the legend of the Caritas [a charity] 'applause' That’s nice of you, but you’re taking up my time.
The Caritas-myth leads even people who are not really connected to the church to believe that the Churches are doing oh-so-much good, yet only 1.8 percent of the Caritas and the Diakonie [another charity] are financed by the church; the rest is government-funded. Pretty cheap advertising.
But as difficult as the job of criticising religion might be, one thing should be clear: it’s absolutely necessary that we do it.
Because as long as religious groups believe themselves to hold absolute truths; as long as German dioceses are almost completely funded with taxes, not church taxes, but our taxes, yet are controlled by the undemocratic Vatican; as long as we pay "professional christians“ for calling homosexuality an unnatural sin; and as long as we dismiss the much-needed criticism of islam as "islamophobic“ and "racist“, we can and must criticise religion.
Finally, let me tell you that we - just like the critics of nuclear energy - offer alternatives, of course. And those alternatives are "enlightenment“ (/Aufklärung) and "humanism“ with their three pillars: Science, to find out more about our world, Philosophy, to interpret those findings, and Art, to fulfill humanities desire for creativity and love of life.
We want religion to be a private affair, religiousness to be a private affair, we want religion separated from the state politically, legally, and most important: financially.
We are for ethics that respect humans, and by the way, all other animals, instead of "godly morals“; we prefer the Here and Now over the Hereafter, "Heidenspaß“ (huge fun, lit. a heathen’s fun) over "Höllenqual“ (agony, lit. hell’s torment), "For“- 'applause' I’d like to get this lovely quote off my mind; "For we who can split atoms“, says Michael Schmidt-Salomon, "and communicate via satellites, must possess the necessary emotional and intellectual maturity, and a two thousand years old mythology that was devised by a primitive herder culture will not help us with that." Thank you.
*___*