Should Governments regulate fraudulent religions?


#121

Lying to help our most vulnerable and gullible from their cash, which is fraud, absolutely.

Do you not think we should enforce the law of the land?

Regards
DL


#122

It is only fraud if something is absolutely false by our sensory perception.

If a company says a product is made of wood, where in reality by human perception, it is in fact not made of wood, that is fraud.

If someone says “come and donate to our church to find salvation in the afterlife” you cannot disprove by any measurable means.


#123

Unless you use on of these things


#124

No. Allowing the government to determine what is “legitimate” and “illegitimate” religion gives them undue power and can be a serious threat to religious liberty. A better solution would be to educate the populace, especially older citizens, in order to avoid being taken in by manipulative groups, whether those be Scientologist or Prosperity Theologians.


#125

Reverse onus much?

Look up logical fallacy.

It is not to me to show the lie so much as the liar to show he did not.

A few quick questions would show that he has no knowledge of the condemnation of the victim or that salvation is required.

I doubt that a judge would even allow such a statement in his court any more than he would give credence to someone talking of Odin and Thor.

Do you really think a judge would accept and allow fantasy based statements?

Regards
DL


#126

Judges need statements of 100% certainty.

You are running off of the fallacy that just because something cannot be proven, that it is automatically disproven.


#127

I think your putting words in my mouth.

I did not suggest that we do. Not in that way in any case.

My suggestion was to have our authorities enforce our fraud laws against those who lie for cash and victimize our most vulnerable and gullible.

Regards
DL


#128

Not really. I am saying that if something is unproven, statements that indicate it is real, are lies, and that liars should not be allowed fleece the vulnerable by fraudsters who use those lies.

Regards
DL


#129

But for them, it is considered real through their own faith.


#130

That does not excuse the fact that they are lying for the victims cash.

Cash for facts. No problem.
Cash for lies. Fraud.

Regards
DL


#131

This argument has gotten cyclical, and boils down to the fact that you think anyone who says something which is not of absolute certainty a lie.


#132

Nope.

But religious liars and con men show certainty in what they cannot possibly know.

See the difference?

Regards
DL


#133

But for them, they truly are certain of it, just as certain as they are that beyond Earth there is space


#134

Do you really think that a can man believes his own lies?

If so. Come back and say so after you watch this and google around a bit.

Regards
DL


#135

Not if he does not think them to be lies.

Not all preachers believe what they are saying is false.


#136

You are likely right as there are all kinds of fools.

How can you know this as a fact?

Are you sure, beyond a doubt, that your statement is true?

I’m just curious as to the use of language.

Regards
DL


#137

Because I do not believe religion exists purely to control people. I believe it has often been abused to do so, but at its foundation, its intents are good.


#138

I agree that control is secondary. Selfish appeasement of our tribal natures is what religions exist to do.

You did not answer my question and deflected.

Regards
DL


#139

I cannot know that this is a fact, I can only have faith in it, in the same way that I believe humans are fundamentally good.


#140

That has evidence and proofs.

Faith without evidence and proofs is for fools.

To think that liars are fundamentally good is ridiculous.

Regards
DL