09-16-2010, 08:15 AM
I don't quite agree with the anti religious sentiments. Religion is an easy scapegoat for all that goes wrong in the world. It's easy to say that if this or that person had not been religious he would not have done the wrong things. In that same regard we can blame the law for the existence of criminals. After all religion tells you to do the right thing just like the law. When religious figures commit crimes they are like criminals who don't do what their own laws would suggest.
Religion does not naturally include bias. If you look at christianity islam and judaism. The three big dogmatics. They were not originally this dogmatic. Rather they were changed by politics over centuries until they became what they are today.
Even the supposedly extremely undogmatic religions like wicca paganism and shamanism have their members who would gladly judge another person to be less "good" at that particular religion. Whatever this means...
I once was in a bar where a group of pagans meet. I was given the third degree by someone there. Who concluded I wasn't a very good witch.. In this case I happen to agree. But the foolishness of thinking we can look at another person and know what they need based on our own experience is jaw dropping. It's arrogant, and the blindness to that personal arrogance is astonishing.
Now that is the principle of dogmatism. A person who uses his own insights to judge another person. And who would use his own experiences to dictate to another person what is right and what is wrong.
Whether that person is part of a religion or is opposed to religion really makes very little difference they're dogmatic evangelists for their own worldviews.
The idea that we can leave religion behind us goes against what I know of neurology and the human brain.. We are wired to experience religion. Some of us more some of us less. If anything the current scandals regarding so many priests who have abused children.. You cannot take a brain wired to experience sex and forbid it not to experience sex without causing aberrations.
You similarly cannot take a brain wired to experience religion and forbid it to experience religion without causing aberrations... It will happen. People will follow religion even if it will kill them. People will have sex even if it will kill them. People will sleep with the mad dictators wife.
Now what we can do is make it a private affair, and I am all for it... It should be considered highly impolite and a loss of decorum for people to discuss religion with those who are not interested in it. Same as sex. If I go and bother someone whom I happen to want to share sexual feelings with, it is considered an assault and that person will feel violated. Many people feel violated when others who happen to want to share religious feelings with them bother them... So why is this not a form of assault? People can be deeply offended when an evangelist approaches them on the street. That's clear and pragmatic and something we can base laws on.
I hope the contributions to society/art/science that religion has helped to make stand for themselves and that people are well aware of them.
It's very popular, very 21st century to complain about religion. It's very unpopular to actually have a balanced view about religion.
Consider it like this... If someone takes the Law of One and concludes offering catalyst to others is STO. Then Ra, the Law of One and all those involved are responsible for the catalyst this individual chooses to offer?
Religion does not naturally include bias. If you look at christianity islam and judaism. The three big dogmatics. They were not originally this dogmatic. Rather they were changed by politics over centuries until they became what they are today.
Even the supposedly extremely undogmatic religions like wicca paganism and shamanism have their members who would gladly judge another person to be less "good" at that particular religion. Whatever this means...
I once was in a bar where a group of pagans meet. I was given the third degree by someone there. Who concluded I wasn't a very good witch.. In this case I happen to agree. But the foolishness of thinking we can look at another person and know what they need based on our own experience is jaw dropping. It's arrogant, and the blindness to that personal arrogance is astonishing.
Now that is the principle of dogmatism. A person who uses his own insights to judge another person. And who would use his own experiences to dictate to another person what is right and what is wrong.
Whether that person is part of a religion or is opposed to religion really makes very little difference they're dogmatic evangelists for their own worldviews.
The idea that we can leave religion behind us goes against what I know of neurology and the human brain.. We are wired to experience religion. Some of us more some of us less. If anything the current scandals regarding so many priests who have abused children.. You cannot take a brain wired to experience sex and forbid it not to experience sex without causing aberrations.
You similarly cannot take a brain wired to experience religion and forbid it to experience religion without causing aberrations... It will happen. People will follow religion even if it will kill them. People will have sex even if it will kill them. People will sleep with the mad dictators wife.
Now what we can do is make it a private affair, and I am all for it... It should be considered highly impolite and a loss of decorum for people to discuss religion with those who are not interested in it. Same as sex. If I go and bother someone whom I happen to want to share sexual feelings with, it is considered an assault and that person will feel violated. Many people feel violated when others who happen to want to share religious feelings with them bother them... So why is this not a form of assault? People can be deeply offended when an evangelist approaches them on the street. That's clear and pragmatic and something we can base laws on.
I hope the contributions to society/art/science that religion has helped to make stand for themselves and that people are well aware of them.
It's very popular, very 21st century to complain about religion. It's very unpopular to actually have a balanced view about religion.
Consider it like this... If someone takes the Law of One and concludes offering catalyst to others is STO. Then Ra, the Law of One and all those involved are responsible for the catalyst this individual chooses to offer?