Anonymous
04/16/2026 17:24
Subject: How can rational people believe in any religion?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Also Buddhism isn't deistic. Rational people are practitioners.
Reincarnation is rational?
There is as much empirical evidence for reincarnation as there is against. Flip a coin.
Could you possibly genuinely believe this?
Insert Leprechauns, Godzilla, Faeries, Flying Pigs or any other thing that does not exist and you get the same result.
"Flip a coin"? Lol. This post explains so much to me about our modern world.
Anonymous
04/16/2026 13:04
Subject: How can rational people believe in any religion?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Agree, OP.
I don't have any issue with personal faith.
But religion? Organized religions? Absolute corruption, completely embedded with man's selfishness and agenda.
That's a very narrow, ignorant view of what goes on. Who do you think feeds people in need? It's not the government.
It certainly is. And the government is people. People feed people.
+1
We don’t need religion to support people.
DMARC receives 40,000-pound donation from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints
https://www.kcci.com/article/dmarc-receives-40000-pound-donation-from-the-church-of-jesus-christ-of-latter-day-saints/71030230
DES MOINES, Iowa —
“The Des Moines Area Religious Council (DMARC) received 40,000 pounds of food from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, Wednesday morning.
The donation is part of the church's America 250 Celebration. The semi dropping off food in Iowa is one of 250 being delivered to food banks in all 50 states, according to DMARC. The food was donated by farmers and other members of the church's congregation nationwide.
"The need continues to rise in Greater Des Moines as we're seeing higher fuel prices, as we're seeing higher food costs, families' budgets are getting stretched thinner and thinner," said DMARC CEO Kathy Underhill.
DMARC said nearly 29,000 Iowans visited its locations last month to access food, marking the highest monthly total since 2025, with the exception of October and November, when the federal government shutdown affected food assistance programs.“
You are lying to yourself.
I am not a Mormon, but it’s straight up false that religious and institutions aren’t a significant support for society, and is unmatched.
The government doesn’t support and help people; taxpayers do. The government just makes programs to hand out taxpayer money while taking credit for it.
The Mormons have enough taxpayer sheltered money to feed everyone in America for the next decade, and they hoard it. They don’t even help their own in need. Tax them.
Mormons also have a religious obligation to hoard food. Their "donations" are just their routinely rotating their supply, which is also in their doctrine. Good Mormons are supposed to keep either a 1 or 2 year supply of food in reserve in anticipation of hardship like earthly catastrophes or economic collapse or another religious persecution.
Taxing churches should be a no-brainer. The "faithful" have enormous amounts of wealth, which they give away to their churches for the benefit of the church and pastors. Then the "faithful" apply for federal benefits to replace this wealth when they can't pay their mortgage or fix their vehicles with "god vouchers"
I have a ton of Jesus cousins who have squandered all their resources on guns and ammunition and giving to their churches so that they don't disgrace their pastors by making them "travel on the ground" when they should be high in the sky on wings with their God.
My one cousin can't pay the mortgage on his 1 story ranch home at 65.
I do. not. care.
Anonymous
04/16/2026 12:07
Subject: How can rational people believe in any religion?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Also Buddhism isn't deistic. Rational people are practitioners.
Reincarnation is rational?
There is as much empirical evidence for reincarnation as there is against. Flip a coin.
Anonymous
04/16/2026 11:39
Subject: How can rational people believe in any religion?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Agree, OP.
I don't have any issue with personal faith.
But religion? Organized religions? Absolute corruption, completely embedded with man's selfishness and agenda.
That's a very narrow, ignorant view of what goes on. Who do you think feeds people in need? It's not the government.
It certainly is. And the government is people. People feed people.
+1
We don’t need religion to support people.
DMARC receives 40,000-pound donation from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints
https://www.kcci.com/article/dmarc-receives-40000-pound-donation-from-the-church-of-jesus-christ-of-latter-day-saints/71030230
DES MOINES, Iowa —
“The Des Moines Area Religious Council (DMARC) received 40,000 pounds of food from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, Wednesday morning.
The donation is part of the church's America 250 Celebration. The semi dropping off food in Iowa is one of 250 being delivered to food banks in all 50 states, according to DMARC. The food was donated by farmers and other members of the church's congregation nationwide.
"The need continues to rise in Greater Des Moines as we're seeing higher fuel prices, as we're seeing higher food costs, families' budgets are getting stretched thinner and thinner," said DMARC CEO Kathy Underhill.
DMARC said nearly 29,000 Iowans visited its locations last month to access food, marking the highest monthly total since 2025, with the exception of October and November, when the federal government shutdown affected food assistance programs.“
You are lying to yourself.
I am not a Mormon, but it’s straight up false that religious and institutions aren’t a significant support for society, and is unmatched.
The government doesn’t support and help people; taxpayers do. The government just makes programs to hand out taxpayer money while taking credit for it.
The Mormons have enough taxpayer sheltered money to feed everyone in America for the next decade, and they hoard it. They don’t even help their own in need. Tax them.
Anonymous
04/16/2026 10:06
Subject: How can rational people believe in any religion?
Anonymous wrote:I am not a Mormon, but it’s straight up false that religious and institutions aren’t a significant support for society, and is unmatched.
The government doesn’t support and help people; taxpayers do. The government just makes programs to hand out taxpayer money while taking credit for it.
But we don't need religion to feed people. We have the societal mechanisms in place to do that.
The government is the people. WE can take credit for helping our own people. Which is why people who care about others elect representatives who will fight to support people in times of need.
Anonymous
04/16/2026 09:54
Subject: How can rational people believe in any religion?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Agree, OP.
I don't have any issue with personal faith.
But religion? Organized religions? Absolute corruption, completely embedded with man's selfishness and agenda.
That's a very narrow, ignorant view of what goes on. Who do you think feeds people in need? It's not the government.
It certainly is. And the government is people. People feed people.
The government is funded by taxpayers. The government doesn’t have any money; it takes money in the form of taxes from taxpayers.
The government is elected officials who vote to give out taxpayer money.
Anonymous
04/16/2026 09:09
Subject: How can rational people believe in any religion?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Agree, OP.
I don't have any issue with personal faith.
But religion? Organized religions? Absolute corruption, completely embedded with man's selfishness and agenda.
That's a very narrow, ignorant view of what goes on. Who do you think feeds people in need? It's not the government.
It certainly is. And the government is people. People feed people.
+1
We don’t need religion to support people.
DMARC receives 40,000-pound donation from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints
https://www.kcci.com/article/dmarc-receives-40000-pound-donation-from-the-church-of-jesus-christ-of-latter-day-saints/71030230
DES MOINES, Iowa —
“The Des Moines Area Religious Council (DMARC) received 40,000 pounds of food from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, Wednesday morning.
The donation is part of the church's America 250 Celebration. The semi dropping off food in Iowa is one of 250 being delivered to food banks in all 50 states, according to DMARC. The food was donated by farmers and other members of the church's congregation nationwide.
"The need continues to rise in Greater Des Moines as we're seeing higher fuel prices, as we're seeing higher food costs, families' budgets are getting stretched thinner and thinner," said DMARC CEO Kathy Underhill.
DMARC said nearly 29,000 Iowans visited its locations last month to access food, marking the highest monthly total since 2025, with the exception of October and November, when the federal government shutdown affected food assistance programs.“
You are lying to yourself.
I am not a Mormon, but it’s straight up false that religious and institutions aren’t a significant support for society, and is unmatched.
The government doesn’t support and help people; taxpayers do. The government just makes programs to hand out taxpayer money while taking credit for it.
Anonymous
04/16/2026 09:01
Subject: How can rational people believe in any religion?
Anonymous wrote:I have thought and thought about this. How can anyone believe religion is real? To me it is all superstition. I can understand why some people need it— it gives them community, structure, for some, morals and for others excuses to commit atrocities. But really, what separates idol worship from Jesus worship or monotheism? In my mind it is all a bunch of made up nonsense that is not grounded in reality. It’s crazy to think that highly intelligent people believe all this.
The same old rants from the same old people.
Anonymous
04/14/2026 19:10
Subject: How can rational people believe in any religion?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Agree, OP.
I don't have any issue with personal faith.
But religion? Organized religions? Absolute corruption, completely embedded with man's selfishness and agenda.
That's a very narrow, ignorant view of what goes on. Who do you think feeds people in need? It's not the government.
It certainly is. And the government is people. People feed people.
+1
We don’t need religion to support people.
Anonymous
04/14/2026 17:38
Subject: How can rational people believe in any religion?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Agree, OP.
I don't have any issue with personal faith.
But religion? Organized religions? Absolute corruption, completely embedded with man's selfishness and agenda.
That's a very narrow, ignorant view of what goes on. Who do you think feeds people in need? It's not the government.
It certainly is. And the government is people. People feed people.
Anonymous
04/13/2026 23:40
Subject: How can rational people believe in any religion?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I have thought and thought about this. How can anyone believe religion is real? To me it is all superstition. I can understand why some people need it— it gives them community, structure, for some, morals and for others excuses to commit atrocities. But really, what separates idol worship from Jesus worship or monotheism? In my mind it is all a bunch of made up nonsense that is not grounded in reality. It’s crazy to think that highly intelligent people believe all this.
Pascal’s wager. If you don’t believe, your kinda an idiot - even to those of us who are scientists with PhDs and study the universe with numbers.
NP. Pascal’s wager isn’t exactly an expression of faith. It’s a cost benefit analysis. Pure game theory.
The wager is that you can’t actually know if God exists, so you might as well hedge the bet that brings the greater upside. Inherent in this is the “not knowing.” Isn’t that agnosticism at its core?
Why would you believe in a thing you don't know if it exists? Especially a thing in a state where conditions are exactly the same if it does not exist as if it does?
That makes zero sense. And people don't take that approach with ANY other belief except for god. Which is what makes it 100% a rationalization designed to simply enable the belief.
That's all Pascal's wager actually is - a rationalization for a presupposed belief.
It’s not rationalization for an existing belief. It’s an argument that one is better off living *as if they believed* based on a calculation of upsides vs downsides that lie along different paths.
It’s a cold calculus, that’s all.
FWIW, Pascal actually did believe. But his wager is game theory.
You’ve convinced me to live as if I believe in Santa. There is only upside!
Not trying to convince you of anything.
But you’re not far off from what the argument is. The difference is that you’ll probably get presents whether it not you believe in Santa.
Pascal’s wager. If you don’t believe in Santa, your (sic) kinda an idiot - even to those of us who are “scientists” with “PhDs” and study the universe with “numbers”.
I’m the PP you’re responding to, but I’m not the one who wrote the post you quoted. I responded to the above poster because I believe they either misunderstood or misrepresented what Pascal’s wager actually was, since they were using it as an answer to the question why people believe.
My point was that rational people can make rational arguments about why it is safer to believe than not (only one path might offer infinite upside), but that’s a fundamentally different thing than having real faith.
I think some people in this thread are so in fight-mode that they didn't understand I wasn’t making myself making the argument that Pascal’s wager makes, I was simply correcting the record on what the wager actually is, and noting that it’s different from real faith and belief.
Will add that I’m quite interested in people who have real faith — not the kind where someone is hedging bets, but rather where they have deep, faith that comes from that small, still voice. But maybe this forum is so filled with people who want to fight that it’s not really a place where someone would be eager to share something that personal.
Anonymous
04/13/2026 23:35
Subject: How can rational people believe in any religion?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I have thought and thought about this. How can anyone believe religion is real? To me it is all superstition. I can understand why some people need it— it gives them community, structure, for some, morals and for others excuses to commit atrocities. But really, what separates idol worship from Jesus worship or monotheism? In my mind it is all a bunch of made up nonsense that is not grounded in reality. It’s crazy to think that highly intelligent people believe all this.
Pascal’s wager. If you don’t believe, your kinda an idiot - even to those of us who are scientists with PhDs and study the universe with numbers.
NP. Pascal’s wager isn’t exactly an expression of faith. It’s a cost benefit analysis. Pure game theory.
The wager is that you can’t actually know if God exists, so you might as well hedge the bet that brings the greater upside. Inherent in this is the “not knowing.” Isn’t that agnosticism at its core?
Why would you believe in a thing you don't know if it exists? Especially a thing in a state where conditions are exactly the same if it does not exist as if it does?
That makes zero sense. And people don't take that approach with ANY other belief except for god. Which is what makes it 100% a rationalization designed to simply enable the belief.
That's all Pascal's wager actually is - a rationalization for a presupposed belief.
It’s not rationalization for an existing belief. It’s an argument that one is better off living *as if they believed* based on a calculation of upsides vs downsides that lie along different paths.
It’s a cold calculus, that’s all.
FWIW, Pascal actually did believe. But his wager is game theory.
You’ve convinced me to live as if I believe in Santa. There is only upside!
Not trying to convince you of anything.
But you’re not far off from what the argument is. The difference is that you’ll probably get presents whether it not you believe in Santa.
Pascal’s wager. If you don’t believe in Santa, your (sic) kinda an idiot - even to those of us who are “scientists” with “PhDs” and study the universe with “numbers”.
I’m the PP you’re responding to, but I’m not the one who wrote the post you quoted. I responded to the above poster because I believe they either misunderstood or misrepresented what Pascal’s wager actually was, since they were using it as an answer to the question why people believe.
My point was that rational people can make rational arguments about why it is safer to believe than not (only one path might offer infinite upside), but that’s a fundamentally different thing than having real faith.
I think some people in this thread are so in fight-mode that they didn't understand I wasn’t making myself making the argument that Pascal’s wager makes, I was simply correcting the record on what the wager actually is, and noting that it’s different from real faith and belief.
Anonymous
04/13/2026 21:49
Subject: Re:How can rational people believe in any religion?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:How can “rational” people not believe in entities greater than themselves? Start there, then add details.
Many religions explain the unexplained and provide supports of various kinds — including community— in the face of the unbearable.
One doesn't need religion to have community. And you are asking that people start with an irrational position of faith. Lived experience and observation does not support the existence of some magical deity. Human beings in our present evolutionary form have existed for about 300,000 years. There have been innumerable religions over all those eras. Gods and beliefs change all the time. There's clearly a hunger to believe in something. That's very human. Ancient Mesopotamia, Egypt, Greece and so on all had their gods. That doesn't make Isis and Zeus real.
NP: Except that in our society most people have not found a community that replicates what an organized faith provides. In part it's why we have the MAGA left and right now. Some people have swapped out organized religion for politics as religion. Are we any better off?
Anonymous
04/13/2026 21:46
Subject: How can rational people believe in any religion?
Anonymous wrote:Agree, OP.
I don't have any issue with personal faith.
But religion? Organized religions? Absolute corruption, completely embedded with man's selfishness and agenda.
That's a very narrow, ignorant view of what goes on. Who do you think feeds people in need? It's not the government.
Anonymous
04/13/2026 21:20
Subject: How can rational people believe in any religion?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I have thought and thought about this. How can anyone believe religion is real? To me it is all superstition. I can understand why some people need it— it gives them community, structure, for some, morals and for others excuses to commit atrocities. But really, what separates idol worship from Jesus worship or monotheism? In my mind it is all a bunch of made up nonsense that is not grounded in reality. It’s crazy to think that highly intelligent people believe all this.
Pascal’s wager. If you don’t believe, your kinda an idiot - even to those of us who are scientists with PhDs and study the universe with numbers.
NP. Pascal’s wager isn’t exactly an expression of faith. It’s a cost benefit analysis. Pure game theory.
The wager is that you can’t actually know if God exists, so you might as well hedge the bet that brings the greater upside. Inherent in this is the “not knowing.” Isn’t that agnosticism at its core?
Why would you believe in a thing you don't know if it exists? Especially a thing in a state where conditions are exactly the same if it does not exist as if it does?
That makes zero sense. And people don't take that approach with ANY other belief except for god. Which is what makes it 100% a rationalization designed to simply enable the belief.
That's all Pascal's wager actually is - a rationalization for a presupposed belief.
It’s not rationalization for an existing belief. It’s an argument that one is better off living *as if they believed* based on a calculation of upsides vs downsides that lie along different paths.
It’s a cold calculus, that’s all.
FWIW, Pascal actually did believe. But his wager is game theory.
And yet... no one raised an atheist changes their position because of Pascal's wager.
Which is why it is 100% a rationalization enabling someone to hold on to a belief for which their logical mind knows has no logical or evidentiary basis.