There is a growing movement of non-believers in the world who want to see religion meet it's downfall.  Now, they're not going to bomb churches or protest outside churches in Guy Fawkes masks.....oh wait.....well they're not going to bomb churches anyway.

Most of these people have a live and let live policy as well.  They really don't care what someone believes, just as long as that person doesn't try to force their beliefs (whether it be through direct force or via laws or lobbying) on everyone else.  They all share a fundamental belief that religion causes harm to society.  Looking at the history of religion, they have a point.

Obviously, some religions are much more of a threat to civilization than others.  It seems that every faith goes through it's "wild" phase, where it becomes ruthless, brutal.  Judaism actually chronicled this period in their holy book, where they engaged in a deadly ethnic cleansing campaign against the people living in Canaan because God supposedly "gave" them that land.  It makes me wonder, wouldn't it have been easier for God just to make all those people disappear?  It seems kind of pointless for an all-powerful universe creator to rely on a former slave army to destroy cities one-by-one.  At any rate, running into a Jew back then would have been pretty scary.  However, nowadays Judaism is relatively peaceful.  There's a few militant sects, but nothing out of the ordinary for any other religion.  There are even militant sects of Buddhism.

Then we have Christianity, an offshoot of Judaism.  For the first few hundred years, they were pretty peaceful, and there were a lot of martyrs...then they became the ones in charge.  The middle ages saw a reign of Christian terror filled with Inquisitions and Crusades.  Now, the church has calmed down quite a bit, and fits in pretty good with the modern world.

Right on cue, Islam seems to be going through it's rough phase, and as religions go is probably the most threatening to world peace as a whole.  More violent acts are done in the name of Islam every year than those done for all other religions combined.  There is also an unwillingness among the majority of so-called "moderate" muslims to condemn this violence.  Will Islam "mellow out" if given enough time?  Or will the availability of weapons of mass destruction to such an unstable and violent belief system spell the end for us all?  Only time will tell.

It's understandable to see religion as a threat to peace, but I think those who would see the end of all religion make one mistake: they lump all religions as the same thing, and they're not.  People in Israel don't go to bed at night worrying about those Amish suicide bombers.  Religion comes in all shapes and colors, some of which are completely benign, doing absolutely no harm to society.  Many religions practice good things.  Charities for example are often run by churches.  It's incredibly closed-minded to pronounce a blanket condemnation on all religion.

The real and true threat to any civilized society is absolute thinking.  In other words, the threat is seeing everything on "black" or "white" terms.  Nothing is "absolutely" good or evil, and thinking along those "you're either with us or against us" lines can cause a lot of problems.  It got us into this disastrous war with Iraq, among other things.  Certainly religion can play a part in encouraging this behavior, but it's not unique to any one philosophy.  It's dangerous no matter which God one believes or doesn't believe in.  By putting blanket condemnations on things you don't like, you marginalize them.  Proclaiming something "good" or "evil" stops one from truly evaluating it.  Not even Adolf Hitler was completely evil.

This group of non theists also makes this mistake.  People like Dawkins and Hitchens marginalize religion and give it no redeeming value whatsoever.  I may agree with them on their stance that there (probably) is no God or Gods, but I don't think you can just marginalize the faith of billions away like that.  That line of thinking is just as dangerous as that of the rabid evangelical or the Muslim suicide bomber.  The conflict comes when people come together and have wildly different ideas about good and evil.  The smaller this world gets, the less isolate we become, the more and more we'll have to abandon that kind of thinking, or I fear it could be the end of this civilization.
 
   

 


 
 
misterskank on
Re: Is Religion the Real Danger to Society?
I like what you say except -- marginalizing faith is not, repeat not, "just as dangerous as a suicide bomber." Dawkins, Hitchens, and Harris have killed no one.
moralnihilist on
Re: Is Religion the Real Danger to Society?
No, but an anti-religious attitude taken to extremes can.  I know Dawkins and Hitches don't advocate violence towards the religious.  I mentioned them because they have very black-and-white thoughts about religion, and that attitude towards anything can breed intolerance, which leads to violence.
misterskank on
Re: Is Religion the Real Danger to Society?
Well, contempt for religion has inspired religious people to respond violently, but I don't blame that on those with contempt for it. What would be an anti-religious attitude "taken to extremes"? Killing believers? I'm sure the men you mention aren't interested in that. Jokes at the expense of believers? I think that's okay, even if the Moslems riot over irreverent cartoons. Dawkins and Hitchens got all fired up over the religious nuts of 9/11. I forgive them. : )
shadeofgray on
Re: Is Religion the Real Danger to Society?
"Not even Adolf Hitler was completely evil"

Hitler did one good thing... he died.
nimbo on
Re: Is Religion the Real Danger to Society?
Thank you. I appreciate that someone who is not religious wrote this.

I think, if there was no belief in God, then people will be killing each other "in the name of justice", or "in the name of goodness" whether what they were doing was just or good at all. But it wouldn't be justice's fault, or goodness' fault, and it wouldn't be so easy to say, "the world would be better without justice" because that's just ludicrous.

I think South Park demonstrated this well... I don't watch a lot of South Park because I don't enjoy  it a lot of the time, but every now and then, they can be pretty smart.

The kids go to the future and discover that there is no longer any religion, but simply enlightenment, everyone is atheist and so the world is a better place where they can all advance and improve. In theory. But there are two warring factions, fighting over what they call themselves in relation to their science-philosophy. They disagree on the name, and kill each other over it, even though their ideaologies are exactly the same.

Getting rid of religions isn't going to change human nature.
nimbo on
Re: Is Religion the Real Danger to Society?
Sorry, to continue, getting rid of religion isn't going to change human nature, but it's like you said, religion can be used as a catalyst for evil, but at the same time, it can also be an excellent motivator for a lot of good.
moralnihilist on
Re: Is Religion the Real Danger to Society?
Someone once said, "Good people will do good things and evil people will do evil things.  But for a good person to do evil things, that takes religion."  I almost agree with that, but instead of saying religion I would broaden the aspect of it to "irrational beliefs" or "a philosophy of absolutes."  Religion can be included in this category, but it's not always the case.

 
Login to replyToggle picture size
 

Latest Comment
Re: Boom - Those are some big rocks by the school all right. I thought they where snow drifts for a second,...

Read...


 
© 2005-2007 MindSay Interactive LLC
| Terms of Service
| Privacy Policy
My Account
Inbox
Account Settings
Lost Password?
Logout
Blog
Update Blog
Edit Old Entries
Pick a Theme
Customize Design
Modify Plugins
Community
Your Profile
Wiki Pages
MindSay Tags
Video & Photos
Geographic Directory
Inside MindSay
About MindSay
MindSay and RSS
Report Spam
Contact Us
Help