Religion kills more people than all other causes combined. Abolish religion.
I don't actually think that's even close to true.
If heart disease and cancer are god's will, it counts. /s
I’m pretty sure they mean human-caused catastrophes. Although if we count meat consumption as a sort of quasi-religious behavior then maybe you’re right.
They are referring to the violence and wars committed over religion.
I'm aware, and I stand by what I said.
Estimates place death from all wars since recorded history at 1.1 billion. I'll grant you a bone and say religion has been responsible for an additional 2 billion deaths through any other means throughout all of history.
Mosquito borne diseases are estimated to have killed 52 billion people throughout history.
Original comment said religion killed more than all other causes put together. That's just simply not true.
Cause in the context above would probably be ideological. So the meaning is compared to other forms of ideology or other reasons for people to kill each other. Not natural disaster or diseases. Because obviously most people die from natural causes, and are not killed.
The original quote that was probably thought of is:
George Carlin: "More people have been killed in the name of God than for any other reason"
Which is like 95% of all war. Mein Kampf mentions god literally dozens of times. No secular democracies have ever gone to war with each other, and virtually all autocratic regimes are religious.
According to John Green, it’s tuberculosis.
Yeah, I have to agree it's basically assuredly not true, even when accounting for:
Undoubtedly religion is hugely harmful, and I'm its biggest detractor that I personally know, but we live in an era where heart disease and cancer exist. Even saying religion causes a plurality of deaths would be wrong; "more than all others combined" is bullshit on a level that I can't believe it got so many upvotes.
We can say that religion results in a fuckload of unnecessary deaths without lying.
So what about the hundreds of years where medical science was banned from studying the body. Where they had to steal corpses and learn in secrecy. How many deaths from cancer and heart disease could have prevented had we not been stifled.
We are still banned from studying stem cells to a degree or using them for cures if they came from a fetus. Religion is still preventing medical advancement for no reason.
I've been thinking about this for a minute, and I think a good standard here is making a list of (relatively) non-overlapping causes of death that have claimed over a billion human lives.
Infectious disease is almost certainly at least one entry on this list, primarily secular war as well, starvation/famine probably a few times over, cancer and heart disease are probably distinct entries, and death attempting to grow/hunt food. I suspect deaths by religion could be on that list as well, but it's the entry I'm least confident in.
In every sense of the word, this is a bad list to be on, but I don't think religion is near the biggest culprit on the list, even if you do a lot of special pleading, and group all deaths by religious cause together, but split each disease, war, etc up for some reason.
I religion is shit, but mosquitoes (and the myriad of illnesses they transmit) have killed more humans than humans have.
Faith is less than nothing when weighed against observable, measurable fact. Religion should never be allowed to overrule science.
I believe in freedom of religion, but if your religion prohibits you from the practice of medicine, you are not allowed to have a hospital. Jehovah's Witnesses and Scientologists don't have hospitals either.
Religion is like your dick: keep it to yourself in public, only share it with the consent of others, and you're solely responsible for any consequences arising from its use.
And you especially keep it away from children.
if your religion prohibits you from the practice of medicine, you are not allowed to have a hospital.
That should be obvious, but to the religious it's apparently not.
Freedom of religion is an overused term, to allow special treatment for religion.
Religions should have no more rights than ideology, because they are nothing more.
They should have no more protection against discrimination than ideology, because they are nothing more.
That means a harmful religion can be banned, and it is NOT discrimination but civilization.
We have freedom of thought, but religion should not have priority or privileges over other types of thought.
Nearly all our hospitals are run by church folk, so their beliefs are applied to all patients. Certain elective or life saving procedures alike have seen this story in some form.
If faith is all you have, you have less than nothing.
Hospitals should not be owned religious institutions. Here is a general reminder to anyone who has a Primary Care at a Catholic or Christian hospital. If you have an alternative hospital that supports the full spectrum of reproductive health, then leave the religious zealot hospital and tell them why.
I'm in Arkansas. Non religious hospitals exist?
For you? No.
For other people? Sometimes.
Luckyyyyy
Bible Belt sucks. The firm grip religion has on every aspect of everyone’s lives it’s sickening. I’m under the same predicament. It’s a PITA.
People should also be aware that not all catholic hospitals are open about being catholic. In some areas they are buying up smaller practices and entire hospitals but keeping it's previous name so it's confusing and harder to avoid them.
This is my take. They're pretty much a business.
Catholic colleges too. They're making money AND taking public funds.
Businesses with a religious dogma that makes victims out of people for needing healthcare.
At least they had compassionate nurses…
Painted into a corner, the Nusslocks were forced to drive to a nearby facility that was not bound by religious restriction — but not before a nurse at Providence handed them a bucket and some towels “in case something happens in the car.”
Our healthcare system is so efficient that after a hospital refuses to provide care thanks to religious nutjobs, the at-risk patient has to take a bucket and a towel and drive themselves to another hospital instead of being taken by an ambulance with actual medical personnel. Maybe they were just 10 grand short of being able to afford it.
Holy fuck.
"Oh, you said abortion. I thought you said a bucket. My bad."
I think to call yourself a hospital the law should require them to adhere to medical science, not a religious belief. If they want to be religion first, and medical second, then they should be a private clinic that is labeled as such so people know they are not going to get the full hospital medical care one would expect from an institution calling itself a hospital.
We should have a law that keeps religious organizations from receiving Medicaid and Medicare reimbursements. That would stop this shit real quick.
Freedom of religion my ass.
Religion is harmful and dangerous, and should absolutely be required to follow the law at the very minimum.
Otherwise it cannot be acknowledged in a civilized society. And should not only lose tax benefits, but be outlawed.
"Freedom of religion" at this point is a relic from when literally everyone was severely delusional. Religion and voting is like drinking and driving.
Religion is politics is ridiculous, religion in healthcare is just beyond unacceptable and completely fucked up
supreme court gonna allow this deadly nonsense and turn hospitals into religious death panels. Let the doctors decide things not a bunch of bean counters
One of the worse parts is that they may soon have the only delivery ward in their area.
Let me guess, thanks to Steward?
I heard this on the radio and they were calling the hospital Providence, I didn't even know it was Catholic.
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.