|
I received a "friend" request from a person with the screen name of, "ReglionIsACrutch"
I sent them a message which I've copied and pasted below. I appreciate your opinions and I thought I'd see if you had an opinion on what I wrote.
____________________
THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE
____________________
The basis of my message is borne from an assumption created from your screen name of "ReligionIsACrutch", that you're not a person who subscribes to a belief is a higher power, a God.
O.K, consider this. Let's say you die tomorrow and there is a God. How's it going to be, you, trying to explain to God why you should go to heaven.
Let me imagine the conversation.
You say, "Well duh, I believe now but, all the evidence I had showed you didn't exist"
God replies, "You chose not to listen to the message of, have faith. So get ye to to that other place"
You say, "O.K but can I go to the toilet before I leave?".
God replies in a booming voice, "No, I think you'll find it's written as eternal damnation WITHOUT relief".....boom tish(Thanks to Rowan Atkinson for that joke)
On the other hand, let's imagine there is no God. Just for a moment and think about what that would mean to a religious person.
The religious person dies. Their body rots and though that process. Their body returns to the earth. End of story.
Yet, during their life, when they practiced their religion as it's supposed to, it was a good thing. It taught correct values. That is never a bad thing.
I know you will now want to debate the issue of those who claim their God gives them the rights of power over other people, at the extreme, to kill. This is not about those people. This is about believing or not believing.
I'm talking about people who practice religion as it's doctrines are really meant to be understood. Basically, religion teaches, be kind to one another.
So, I'm confused as to as to how you came to the conclusion that such a doctrine is a crutch. A crutch for what?. Hi Ian, Well, I'm not a fan of religion, particularly. I do agree that it's sometimes a "crutch", definitely. However, what's interesting is if we look at what religion means to people, as dependent on the shifting tides of culture. I'd say that at the moment, it appeals as a sense of Self and belonging, as well as a justification of aspired righteousness. Religion has made quite the comeback, since 9/11, and I don't think that's because people want to learn good values, nor do I particularly think it's because it's an adequate crutch (though, most certainly, that has always been an appeal; it appeases our insecurity, on so many levels). I think it has offered purpose in a threatened world, and then mixes in, quite dangerously, with the fear and the sense that a side must be chosen. Of course, "religion" is such a broad term. I have no problem with the Buddhists, and they're a religion. I have no real problem with the Hindus. I have a huge problem with the Christians and the Muslims. And I think that's where I would respond to your message, by asking what those good values are that you speak of? I think it leads people to become imprisoned in ignorance and judgement, I think it's destructive to others, I really don't see those values. Christianity has the PR spin down, but when you get real about it, very few factions actually live by those slogans. Christianity is, after all, currently at war, and it's discrimination is at the core of so much of this society that is, at the end of the day, one founded on so-called Christian "values". I don't think they're so terribly kind to others - I think they're kind to themselves.There'll always be exceptions to the rule, but I've no time for something that has done so much harm to our society and culture. It's unnecessary. But I have no problem with religions that do not harm others with their ideologies (I just don't subscribe to them - but each to their own). But Christianity and Islam are both as bad as each other, in that respect, and I can't think of anyone more un-Christ-like, than the men who run the major Christian churches. George Pell teaches everybody values, doesn't he, in the daily Telegraph, every week? They're values I can live without. And I think that the individual who can be kind to others, because he or she follows their own sense of self and what is right, is a much happier, healthier person than one who requires a set of rules that is given to them, in order to "know" what's what.
And so, I agree that there may be some who do treat others kindly - but, outside of Christ, I have a huge problem with those "doctrines", because they're full of hatred and discrimination and just really absurd, ancient, primitive ways of looking at being human. But it eclipses the simplicity of being a "crutch". Thanks, Aaron
|
