<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.1.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Fear: The Foundation of Religion</title>
	<link>http://ccannizzaro.com/2007/fear-the-foundation-of-religion/</link>
	<description>"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy."</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 19 Jul 2008 11:07:10 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.1.2</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: Disgusted Beyond Belief</title>
		<link>http://ccannizzaro.com/2007/fear-the-foundation-of-religion/#comment-22</link>
		<author>Disgusted Beyond Belief</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2007 17:59:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://ccannizzaro.com/2007/fear-the-foundation-of-religion/#comment-22</guid>
					<description>I think the foundation of religion on fear is also related to why the fear-mongering party, the GOP, is the party of the religious right.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the foundation of religion on fear is also related to why the fear-mongering party, the GOP, is the party of the religious right.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris</title>
		<link>http://ccannizzaro.com/2007/fear-the-foundation-of-religion/#comment-24</link>
		<author>Chris</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2007 19:07:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://ccannizzaro.com/2007/fear-the-foundation-of-religion/#comment-24</guid>
					<description>Is the GOP a fear-mongering party because it's heavily influenced by organized religion, or is the GOP  attractive to organized religion because they are a fear-mongering party?

Is either correct? Does it matter?

Hmmmmm, future post maybe...  But I would suspect that the former is the true statement.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is the GOP a fear-mongering party because it&#8217;s heavily influenced by organized religion, or is the GOP  attractive to organized religion because they are a fear-mongering party?</p>
<p>Is either correct? Does it matter?</p>
<p>Hmmmmm, future post maybe&#8230;  But I would suspect that the former is the true statement.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Conway</title>
		<link>http://ccannizzaro.com/2007/fear-the-foundation-of-religion/#comment-50</link>
		<author>Conway</author>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Apr 2007 04:33:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://ccannizzaro.com/2007/fear-the-foundation-of-religion/#comment-50</guid>
					<description>Wow, I can't believe that most of my beliefs I considered unique to myself would be found over here. Amazing how we both came to this "religion based on fear" conclusion.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow, I can&#8217;t believe that most of my beliefs I considered unique to myself would be found over here. Amazing how we both came to this &#8220;religion based on fear&#8221; conclusion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Conway</title>
		<link>http://ccannizzaro.com/2007/fear-the-foundation-of-religion/#comment-51</link>
		<author>Conway</author>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Apr 2007 04:42:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://ccannizzaro.com/2007/fear-the-foundation-of-religion/#comment-51</guid>
					<description>However, I don't know if the world would be a better place without religion though. Without a "death foundation (heaven)" of any sort, many people would probably go crazy or suffer from severe depression.

And anyways, religion DOES stress good morals, even if the reasons may be ambiguous.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>However, I don&#8217;t know if the world would be a better place without religion though. Without a &#8220;death foundation (heaven)&#8221; of any sort, many people would probably go crazy or suffer from severe depression.</p>
<p>And anyways, religion DOES stress good morals, even if the reasons may be ambiguous.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris</title>
		<link>http://ccannizzaro.com/2007/fear-the-foundation-of-religion/#comment-54</link>
		<author>Chris</author>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Apr 2007 15:29:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://ccannizzaro.com/2007/fear-the-foundation-of-religion/#comment-54</guid>
					<description>Perhaps I should continue this in another post, because I'm sure the explanation would be worthy, but I'll paraphrase here.

I wasn't trying to say that the world would be better off without religion altogether.  My assertion that fear is the foundation is directed more at organized religion.  In other words, I don't think that those people who supposedly "share a personal relationship with a god" (and acknowledge that it is only their personal relationship that matters) are always basing that belief entirely on fear.

I think that fear, instead, is used to control the masses that are needed in order for organized religion to force its ideology upon everyone around them - including those that don't willingly subscribe to their school of thought - starting in childhood when people are most vulnerable to the feeling of fear and continuing through adulthood mainly by playing politics.

Furthermore, the natural extension or reach of a personal relationship, when acknowledged by the theist, is relatively limited.  So even if fear was at the foundation of that belief, whatever adverse effects might be present would be confined.

Does that make sense?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Perhaps I should continue this in another post, because I&#8217;m sure the explanation would be worthy, but I&#8217;ll paraphrase here.</p>
<p>I wasn&#8217;t trying to say that the world would be better off without religion altogether.  My assertion that fear is the foundation is directed more at organized religion.  In other words, I don&#8217;t think that those people who supposedly &#8220;share a personal relationship with a god&#8221; (and acknowledge that it is only their personal relationship that matters) are always basing that belief entirely on fear.</p>
<p>I think that fear, instead, is used to control the masses that are needed in order for organized religion to force its ideology upon everyone around them - including those that don&#8217;t willingly subscribe to their school of thought - starting in childhood when people are most vulnerable to the feeling of fear and continuing through adulthood mainly by playing politics.</p>
<p>Furthermore, the natural extension or reach of a personal relationship, when acknowledged by the theist, is relatively limited.  So even if fear was at the foundation of that belief, whatever adverse effects might be present would be confined.</p>
<p>Does that make sense?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Conway</title>
		<link>http://ccannizzaro.com/2007/fear-the-foundation-of-religion/#comment-60</link>
		<author>Conway</author>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Apr 2007 23:15:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://ccannizzaro.com/2007/fear-the-foundation-of-religion/#comment-60</guid>
					<description>Yeah, I understand that perfectly. I once had to go through that same feeling of fear when I was younger. 

Eventually, I started thinking logically (I was keen at doing that at that time. I'm still like that now), and formed my own beliefs about how and why this world works, both religious-wise and non-religious-wise. After that, I kinda' started respecting how short life is, so I'm trying to enjoy it while it lasts.

But on a different note, I noticed a funny thing about how those long-ago explorers (like Sir Richard Francis Burton) come to play in our discussion. In the olden times, where gaps lie in our knowledge of the world, there were many superstitions about monsters and cataclysms beyond the horizon. After all, as was claimed, who knows what's out there? And yet, while religion fears this unknown, explorers welcome it. With their adventuring spirit, they carved our world into what it is now. After all, every modern-day child's dream has once been to become an astronaut, one who screams with joy upon embracing the deep abyss of outer space. There's no denying that this explorer's curiosity is a natural part of us. However, oddly enough, fearing the unknown (religion) is also a part of us.

A yin-yang relationship perhaps? Interesting.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, I understand that perfectly. I once had to go through that same feeling of fear when I was younger. </p>
<p>Eventually, I started thinking logically (I was keen at doing that at that time. I&#8217;m still like that now), and formed my own beliefs about how and why this world works, both religious-wise and non-religious-wise. After that, I kinda&#8217; started respecting how short life is, so I&#8217;m trying to enjoy it while it lasts.</p>
<p>But on a different note, I noticed a funny thing about how those long-ago explorers (like Sir Richard Francis Burton) come to play in our discussion. In the olden times, where gaps lie in our knowledge of the world, there were many superstitions about monsters and cataclysms beyond the horizon. After all, as was claimed, who knows what&#8217;s out there? And yet, while religion fears this unknown, explorers welcome it. With their adventuring spirit, they carved our world into what it is now. After all, every modern-day child&#8217;s dream has once been to become an astronaut, one who screams with joy upon embracing the deep abyss of outer space. There&#8217;s no denying that this explorer&#8217;s curiosity is a natural part of us. However, oddly enough, fearing the unknown (religion) is also a part of us.</p>
<p>A yin-yang relationship perhaps? Interesting.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
