Does Humanity Need Religion?

[JD8]

To suggest that we don't need "religion" to have morality, to me, starts with a basic premise that some sort of western civilization or reasonable facsimile is the default human condition. History suggests it is not. I think it sounds good in theory but in practice, it leads directly to savagery.

Aside from ignoring basic biological principles like altruism, this is great lie that the religious will tell you. Personally, I can speak of several non-religious people, including myself that somehow magically manage day to day life without savagery. If anything, in business and my personal life, I can without a doubt say my morals are significantly more in tact than many religious individuals I've come across. In fact, the more religious they are, the less I trust them, as I usually find that they are compensating for something by vomiting their faux morals upon me.

As a woman, I fare far better with the protections provided by Christianity than I lose in its absence.

How did those protections work out for Native American women so long ago? or black women who were slaves? or homosexual women that wanted to marry a few years ago? Too many variables out there in society to thank an ever changing man made religion that has an extensive history of hypocrisy IMO, but that's just me.

 

[JD8]

You may not agree with Christians or think we are foolish but you should be thankful for the Christians that made life on earth what it is today in spite of evil.

You might want to add arrogant to the foolish.

 

[TedKennedy]

How did those protections work out for Native American women so long ago?

Before or after 1492?

 

[donner]

this is fantastic.

we've got one idea saying that we need a way to prove that the world would be better without religion. And another arguing that the atrocities already committed are far better than ones that would have occurred without religion. Oh, and to be thankful for the horrific ends to so many savages since it brought us to the place we are today.

 

[TedKennedy]

this is fantastic.

we've got one idea saying that we need a way to prove that the world would be better without religion. And another arguing that the atrocities already committed are far better than ones that would have occurred without religion. Oh, and to be thankful for the horrific ends to so many savages since it brought us to the place we are today.

I wonder how one's perspective might change were they magically transported back in time. We whine and wring our hands about what our ancestors may have done, but I'd be willing to bet if we were in a Pawnee's moccasins, we'd behave as they did, and if we were in a settler's boots, we'd behave as they did.

Our arrogance is the superiority we feel about our own current morality.

 

[donner]

I wonder how one's perspective might change were they magically transported back in time. We whine and wring our hands about what our ancestors may have done, but I'd be willing to bet if we were in a Pawnee's moccasins, we'd behave as they did, and if we were in a settler's boots, we'd behave as they did.

Our arrogance is the superiority we feel about our own current morality.

What you call 'Our arrogance is the superiority we feel about our own current morality" could also simply be learning from the mistakes of our past.

Nothing about our judgment of how matters were handled will in any way change the outcome now, and most of those people are long past caring about feeling judged i suspect.

They might have felt morally justified by 'taming the savages' but that does not make them right (or wrong), but does influence a discussion about what their religion told them was and was not acceptable.

 

[TedKennedy]

Nothing will change the past, that much is certain. I'm sure religion had less to do with "Manifest Destiny" than simple ambition did. I suppose if we're on the subject of killing savages and the religious seal of approval thereof, then an examination of what said "savages" did and how it related to their religion might be in order.

 

[MaddSkillz]

Are you really? Or are you simply being sarcastic? If it's the latter, what outcome would you have preferred? Europeans stay in Europe? Perhaps only colonize bits of the Americas, leaving the rest to the native population that lived peacefully, in harmony with nature, spreading goodwill to each and every tribe? How exactly would you direct the events of 1492 to the present? Would a Japanese or Chinese occupation of the Americas been better?

It's sarcasm. I just find irony in those champion Christian ideology and pretend those involved in the genocide and theft of land from the natives weren't Christian and it didn't happen. Those people who did that, definitely weren't living with the golden rule in mind. They were greedy and selfish. And upon that, their religion shines. You can see it on every corner in this great state. The religion and ideology of complete and total love... Just don't ask them how they got it to where it is today.

 

[JD8]

It's sarcasm.

You need Jesus.

 

[MaddSkillz]

You need Jesus.

No gracias