Attitude issues

Jess 2021-12-24 08:01:42

As a classmate who has no religious beliefs, I have seen a lot of the madness of popular sects and the absurdity of niche sects. When I watched this film, I laughed energetically. I felt that Bill was really sharp. There is a kind of finally having a child. Debunked the excitement of "the emperor's new clothes". If you want to leave it at that time, you must give five stars nothing to say. But in this semester, I have listened to some good teachers, so now I don’t like the sarcasm and total negation of the talk show host. There are many wisdom and meaningful things in religion, and the formation of various religions also has complicated factors. Taking a step back, at least the beliefs of others should be respected. When Bill confronted a few ordinary Christian believers, he used that tone to talk about their beliefs. In his eyes, he might be "people who know" and they are "people who don't know". His level of knowledge is based on them. Yes, but in my eyes, the people who smiled and discussed with him and finally prayed for him were more gracious than him. To be a Fang Zhouzi-style scientologist is not something to be proud of and awe-inspiring. Its narrowness is even comparable to that of a fanatical missionary of a certain sect. Of course, now I can still understand Bill’s starting point. Under his questioning, I also find the faces of certain religious leaders ridiculous. Under his analysis, I also find the use and fanaticism directed at religions to be absurd. His expression It is indeed wonderful, with Michael Moore's guiding and inciting power. I don't want to deny the value of this film, but now I think rationality and tolerance are the attitudes that should be. In this era of pluralism, everyone (in this case, whether religious or non-religious) does not have the right to be arbitrary. To maintain pluralism and peace at the same time, the first step is to respect and try to understand others. .

View more about Religulous reviews

Extended Reading

Religulous quotes

  • Bill Maher: [Extra] What about when innocent people get killed during a "defensive action"?

    Michael Bray: I'm for that. Yeah. It's collateral damage.

    Bill Maher: But it's acceptable?

    Michael Bray: We've got to consider what the real issue is here and what the cost is and the risk.

  • Bill Maher: [Extra] This is the Anne Frank house, when you see it you really understand how true that phrase "The banality of evil" really is. One of the common arguments in defence of religion is that Hitler wasn't religious and neither was Stalin or Mao and they were bad so religion is good. But like religion itself it's an argument that really depends a lot on not thinking too deeply. For one Hitler himself didn't eliminate anyone personally he had a lot of footsoldiers most of whom were good Christians and they pushed people into the ovens. Religion has done a bad job of stepping up and preventing violence-prone bullies from doing their thing. If anything it usually justifies acts of madness. And 20th Century Fascism and Communism while not strictly religions as we've come to think of religion, really were religions. They were state religions. Hitler was seen as infallable and Godlike. Hirohito was absolutely a God on Earth to the Japanese people. We shouldn't get too hung up on the word religion. The bottom line is whether people think and act rationally or not and whenever they organise their lives around something that could best be described as groundlessness bad things happen. Even if the central story seems harmless like there's a God who loves you so much that he had his only Son whacked so that you could keep on sinning. Still, doesn't matter, once reality has left the building, once it's up there in the ether then anything can be extrapolated or tacked on by Preachers and Priesthoods and delusionals and power-hungry pricks. It's not that big a step from "your God is the only God and he loves you very much" to "you really should get out there and start killing for him" Whenever people believe in something utterly groundless because they were told it by a charismatic preacher and Hitler was nothing if not that, all bets are off. Nazism was a religion, a religion based on the insane fiction that Jews were subhuman vermin who did not deserve to live, but people and people not from a primitive society believed it because A they liked the preacher, B the other sheep around them were buying into it even though it was crazy and C it was inextricably tied to their view of a glorious Valhalla-like future. A, B, C. Religion.