Counting out religions

[blazeofglory]

I kind of engage in unfolding the fact whether or religious beliefs acts as elixirs or they are toxics. Mostly I take them as something that lolls us into a world of delusions, into something unsubstantial or not of this world in point of fact. There are too many examples to put forward the fact that religions more often than not have disgraced us and we have jihads, holy wars in the name of religions. Hitler tried to shore up his own religion, and there were many cases of warring lords involved in accentuating their particular lines of faiths. There are too many examples that endorse the fact that religious beliefs have rendered the world uglier and uglier.
However I can not discount the fact that without religions the world will be uglier and shabbier than it is now. We have no substitution to subrogate it.

I often wonder what we will happen if we totally disregard religions. In point of fact most of our values are rooted in religious beliefs. Our scriptures preach us we must be humble, and sermonizes that we need to be kind and compassionate.

Man if take religious values aside is likened to an animal, and can interbreed between kinfolks, like mother and son can mate in the animal world and but in the human world it is something derogative or unthinkable.

And taking all these considerations I wind up concluding that religions are panaceas some of their wrong applications under certain conditions. Religions have set in our DNA and to ignore religious values is now to offset all we stand for. All our moral, ethical or social codes are inscribed in religions, and upsetting religious values to live on in a society is unimaginable at this juncture now.

[mangueken]

I disrespectfully disagree with your statement, "Religions have set in our DNA and to ignore religious values is now to offset all we stand for. All our moral, ethical or social codes are inscribed in religions, and upsetting religious values to live on in a society is unimaginable at this juncture now."

First, there is no DNA signature for religion. Although, if there was one it would make life a bit easier. At least we would know why we, as a species, tend to believe in impossible things.
Second, you are choosing to only look at those "religious values" that match our contemporary values. Islam, Hinduism and Christianity, just to name the religious "big three", are filled with values that today we despise and reject.
Third, values, ethics and morals have since the ancient Greeks been discussed with no direct relation to religion. For the ancient Greeks and Romans, religion was a state enterprise. Religious practice in both those ancient societies had no implication towards personal belief. Personal belief came about as a result of the break away Jewish sect now called Christianity.

Now, for some questions.
If we apply the same logic of using religious belief as the the government of Israel does in occupying Palestinian territory, does that mean that the Native Americans can start throwing American families from their homes?
What about Mexicans throwing Americans out of their homes through out the southwestern part of the US?
Can Ireland finally take back the Protestant counties in the north?
How about the religious aspects of Darfur?
Last but not least, how would any religion purpose to resolve the fact that the US does not have a national educational system because of the disputes among the various sects of Christianity? Many third world countries have national educational systems that aren't hindered by religious views?
I say these things without meaning to disrespect any one particular religious belief over another. Because each one of the "big three" are filled with contradictory sects that cause themselves enough grief. I just raise them because I wonder why people at large, non-believers and the multitude of believers that exist should accept any one moral, ethical or value orientated belief over another.
Isn't it better to discuss morals and values on a secular playing field, where all are equal, and let personal beliefs remain personal?

[weltanschauung]

systems of control dont target only stereotypical forms of religion... as a matter of fact, there are quite a few gods that get even more unconditional fanatic devotion than those traditional frankensteinish demiurgs...
http://www.financialsense.com/fsu/editorials/gnazzo/2007/nworder/images/0321.h12.jpg

[oopsycandy]

I often wonder what we will happen if we totally disregard religions. In point of fact most of our values are rooted in religious beliefs. Our scriptures preach us we must be humble, and sermonizes that we need to be kind and compassionate.

I disagree, I was born and raised within a family who have no religious beliefs. My value system is based upon my upbringing and life experience. I neither need nor want a god to tell me what is right and wrong. I trust enough in my own intelligence and experience to do this.


Man if take religious values aside is likened to an animal, and can interbreed between kinfolks, like mother and son can mate in the animal world and but in the human world it is something derogative or unthinkable.

Likened to an animal? How? it is generally accepted today that inter family marriage can be damaging only in relation to offspring and the higher risks of genetic conditions being passed on. In ancient Egyptian religions marriage of brothers and sisters was desired in order to preserve the purity of the line of ascension of the pharoh who was a god. It seems that science and the changing morality of civilization has contributed more to the fact that this is now a frowned upon and I believe illegal practice.


All our moral, ethical or social codes are inscribed in religions, and upsetting religious values to live on in a society is unimaginable at this juncture now.

I don't understand how this is true? I may be misunderstanding the point you are trying to make but again I would like to point out that many ancient cultures practised religions and held beliefs that we find extremely bizarre if not morally wrong (the aztec/toltec spring to mind) I would suggest that it may be the change of civilized structure, the move into cities of many people, the specialization of crafts men and the ability to trade skills for money or food which have led to a need to trade and co-exist with many people of different backgrounds and cultures which has in fact shaped modern religion rather than the other way round?

Religion has altered and shaped the world as we know it in profound ways but unless you could show a world without religion for comparison how can we know if it has been a good thing?

[thinkingsam]

Happened to pass by and notice this thread, Just a few points :)


Mostly I take them as something that lolls us into a world of delusions, into something unsubstantial or not of this world in point of fact.

Unsubstantial you say... I take it you don't know anyone who was miraculously healed, or seen a miraculous healing?


There are too many examples to put forward the fact that religions more often than not have disgraced us...
However I can not discount the fact that without religions the world will be uglier and shabbier than it is now. We have no substitution to subrogate it.

I'm glad you feel that religion makes the world less "ugly and shabby" even though there are some examples of religion being harmful. My personal view is that people at some very basic level need rules to live by, whether those rules are taught to us by our parents, our upbringing, our religion, or our teachers. Religion certainly lends itself to that fact, whether or not it is intended to.


In point of fact most of our values are rooted in religious beliefs.

Mmmm... Are you familiar with Paul's writings? He says that the law, i.e. the ten commandments and such, really doesn't make people righteous (e.g. see Romans 3:28).


I often wonder what we will happen if we totally disregard religions... Man if take religious values aside is likened to an animal.

Paul also has something to say about that (with regards to Christianity). He tells his readers that they can disregard "religion" in the form of laws and rules and believe in Jesus for righteousness. Hope I don't sound preachy here; that's simply what Paul said, and what a large number of Christians believe.


I wind up concluding that religions are panaceas ... All our moral, ethical or social codes are inscribed in religions

Interesting point of view. It's possible that our moral (etc) codes stem completely from religion, since religion has been with humanity for time immemorial, although the majority of social scientists will likely not agree with that (that morals etc stem completely from religion).

The evolutionary biologist will likely argue that moral codes stem from our desire to survive: if I help someone, it increases the chances that he will help me back, and thus we will survive better together, while the psychologist may give some sort of mental / emotional explanation for morals. Guess it all depends on who you speak to.

Just my thoughts :)

[Judas130]

Hitler tried to shore up his own religion

gen = race, family, kind (Latin root)

To be of a religion, is to be of a group, or 'kind'. Hitler pushed his concepts of the Aryan Race and the Nazi ideology and it benefited Germany at the time, people adhered to it, giving some supremacy to a beaten and discontented race. This can be seen throughout Western religion - whereby humankind is divine, blessed by God. To be of a religion, is to belong. You can be religious about a musical band, or a united cause, or a racial ideology.


Religions have set in our DNA and to ignore religious values is now to offset all we stand for. All our moral, ethical or social codes are inscribed in religions, and upsetting religious values to live on in a society is unimaginable at this juncture now.

This is an odd thing for you say, before I came back to the board you used to speak of how we are products of our societies. But this statement defies fact. Firstly, religion has become associated with faith, but again, it does not have to concern faith.

religio: "reverence for God or the gods, careful pondering of divine things, piety, the res divinae"

yet the root of religio: ligare "bind, connect" or lego, in the sense of "choose", "go over again" or "consider carefully"

Faith and religion are two separate things. Many are born into a religion, yet without faith (this may be conditioned later through upbringing).

In my opinion, theistic faith is what holds us back as a universal society, can you not see it? the wars in its name, the reverence to an unprovable higher Deity? For humanity to progress, we must detach from the unprovable, and understand, in the teleological sense, the connection of our existence.


I often wonder what we will happen if we totally disregard religions. In point of fact most of our values are rooted in religious beliefs. Our scriptures preach us we must be humble, and sermonizes that we need to be kind and compassionate.

Man if take religious values aside is likened to an animal, and can interbreed between kinfolks, like mother and son can mate in the animal world and but in the human world it is something derogative or unthinkable.

Was this not the way we were created? We are 'created in God's image'. If this be true, God is no more than an animal that breeds with kinfolk. It was HE that allowed us to originally 'sin' to be evil, or 'live' as LaVey would claim. Besides, Jesus, in Christianity, died to absolve us from this sin, so the way we behave naturally is the way God intended us to be! To go against our carnal desires is to go against nature. Yet you are right in saying that there are religious roots in our law systems. We should spend more time praising Life than killing it, and so a degree of our innate desire (such as to hurt when tempered) must be curbed for nature to be allowed to continue.

These 'guilt-laws' that most contemporary religion offers sickens me. why should i repent for being myself? natural law, according to Aquinas, could well be the physical manifestation of divine law, something which is totally independent of human will, yet our perception of it corrupts it through various revelations, yet Aquinas assigns it to other laws - which Natural Law needs in order to be perceived. Yet how can a human law or a divine law help me perceive if both were penned by man?

Darwin simply observed how nature takes it toll on our little planet, and demonstrated a perfectly rational way of observing natural law - the harsh, yet beautiful reality of our world, of what we actually can physically SEE. Nature is supreme, Deity or no Deity, not what a dogmatic group of people believe we should follow.


without religions the world will be uglier and shabbier than it is now I disagree, people nowadays are very detached from their religion. In the UK, religion is barely important, with only a small amount attending a form of Church a week. Politics in this country does not mix with religion, as it has rendered so much of these Isles apart for so long. Perhaps the taint of religion should be abolished - when Bush in America used phrases such as 'crusade' and believed himself to be backed by God, and the impact this had on an eastern society still very effected by the original Crusades, the war becomes not only about greed or geography, but about religion also.

religion, when fused with war or international process, becomes an ugly thing, breeding ignorance for men of other religions. How can our world progress if this is happening? It does not happen, plurality and liberal motives are welcome for the moment, but the authoritative command of all the preceded religion cannot be ignored, when religion becomes so liberal it loses all law, it shall be useless, and with no factual proof of a God, what for it then? Indulge in what you cannot prove and you shall waste the beautiful opportunity to really live and be yourself, how you were created naturally to be.

[crystalmoonshin]

Religion, like everything else, has its pros and cons. I agree that without religion, the world would be more inclined to evil, although we may say that ethics exists and people in general think more of the welfare of others be they believers of a certain religion or not.

But also, we cannot dismiss the fact that religion still contributes to unwise decisions. Take for example the case of the Philippines where the dominant religion is Roman Catholic. The church and the state should be separate bodies but in this country, the two join hands in making policies and laws. Nowadays, there is a rapid population growth and it is attributed to the fact that the church prohibits the use of condoms, saying it is against the idea of procreation. (And I have to add that the Philippines is not capable of providing the basic needs of its every citizen due mainly to the fact that rampant corruption exists in the government.)

In the end, it is the children who suffer from poverty. And all these is because the church meddles in the affairs of the state. It is an evil necessity; it is needed to somehow achieve peace and order in the society but at the same time, it affects the decision-making process of the state.

(Many governments officials themselves are known to be church-goers but these same persons are also capable of putting to death anyone who opposes them. And majority of them have a rather bad reputation of stealing money from the National Treasury. Talk about hypocrites!)