-
I think each religion has its own spectrum of prescriptive morality, ranging from sugary and almost apologetic, to hardline fanatical extremism - though this is often all empty threats. Where religious justification is cited as the rationale behind acts of inhumanity, it tends to be used a smoke screen by economic tyrants who need to pacify the masses by tapping into their conditioned fears.
If you take every faith that's followed in this country, and bung it into a moral blender, you'll probably end up with a reasonable set of ideals. People (in groups) make far more educated decisions about what is workable and what is clearly out-of-order without do-gooding middle class academics telling them what they're capable of weighing up.
If you're not even willing to entertain/acknowledge the outlying militant views, it smacks of repressed fascistic tendencies.
I'm quite pissed.
-
I am sure we can all subscribe to what is basically the 'Golden rule' - 'do onto others as you would have them do on to you' (or something like that) - but my view is that this is not Christian in origin, it is innate in us, a product of reciprocal altruism not a dictate from a homosexual fearing, 'black' hating deity.
Interesting but I disagree. The time of the birth of religion coincides with the time of birth of civilization as we know it.
-
tynan [quote]chris crash yes, now im going to let a roman century rape my daughter to save a guy with a beard whose whole porpoise of living is to be killed by the romans!
Not even close. :)
[/quote]i remember a sermon on giving to the greater good from my catholic school days where a local of juresalim offered his daughter to the romans so they would not search his house for jesus, i read the story later because i knew there was something not quite right about it, they father says basically, go ahead and rape my daughter just dont look in my shed, and they rape and kill her.
-
BringMeMyFix I think each religion has its own spectrum of prescriptive morality, ranging from sugary and almost apologetic, to hardline fanatical extremism - though this is often all empty threats. Where religious justification is cited as the rationale behind acts of inhumanity, it tends to be used a smoke screen by economic tyrants who need to pacify the masses by tapping into their conditioned fears.
Agreed.
BringMeMyFix
If you take every faith that's followed in this country, and bung it into a moral blender, you'll probably end up with a reasonable set of ideals.Probably ?
That's simply a silly idea. Every faith ?
I am sure you are rational and you will remove all the irrational faiths and then further reject the parts of 'rational' faiths (forgive me Spinoza for I have sinned) you do not agree with, does this sound reasonable ?
BringMeMyFix
People (in groups) make far more educated decisions about what is workable and what is clearly out-of-order without do-gooding middle class academics telling them what they're capable of weighing up.People make more 'educated' decisions than 'academics'. ?
Do you know what 'educated' or 'academic' might mean ?
Or is your objection simply one of class, that is: you do not like middle class people ?
Or do you feel 'people' (the nebulous masses I suspect you mean to be the innately 'educated' working classes) are simply better at some things (for as yet undisclosed reasons) ?
Rwanda - 'People make far more educated decisions than educated people'Bloody evil academics with all their learnin' why don't they leave the lovely simple righteous and highly educated (but not academic) folk alone ?
BringMeMyFix
If you're not even willing to entertain/acknowledge the outlying militant views, it smacks of repressed fascistic tendencies.I do not recognize fascism as valid - therefore I have fascistic tendencies ?
-
lpg [quote]I am sure we can all subscribe to what is basically the 'Golden rule' - 'do onto others as you would have them do on to you' (or something like that) - but my view is that this is not Christian in origin, it is innate in us, a product of reciprocal altruism not a dictate from a homosexual fearing, 'black' hating deity.
Interesting but I disagree.[/quote]
Can you tell me, specifically, which part of my post you disagree with ?
lpg
The time of the birth of religion coincides with the time of birth of civilization as we know it.Non-sequitur. I think you may be confusing correlation with causation.
-
chris crash [quote]tynan [quote]chris crash yes, now im going to let a roman century rape my daughter to save a guy with a beard whose whole porpoise of living is to be killed by the romans!
Not even close. :)
[/quote]i remember a sermon on giving to the greater good from my catholic school days where a local of juresalim offered his daughter to the romans so they would not search his house for jesus, i read the story later because i knew there was something not quite right about it, they father says basically, go ahead and rape my daughter just dont look in my shed, and they rape and kill her.[/quote]
I was only joking, I know the story you refer to.
There is quite a lot of sanctioning of rape and slavery, beatings, stoning, genocide, infanticide and general barbarism, the bible is cool ! :)
-
TheBrick(Tommy) . . . .but saying he should not raise and discuss these points because of controversy is tantamount to intellectual suppression, which in a society, which I would hope prides it's self in solid debate and open reasoning is ridiculous. . .
+100,000
Well said, the 'primate' may come out with nonsense only a man invested in supernatural belief could wish to and he may look like an owl - but the fact that he said what he said is not the issue - the issue is in what he said.
I think his espousing of these views is noting but healthy, my own hope is that it will lead to further erosion of supernatural belief and unreason.
Let's not shoot the messenger (even if he delivers his own message!).
-
RPM you wouldn't have got this with the Jewish bloke..
whassisname, Runcie or something
:)
Ol' Robert Runcie was no Jew ! :)
But yes, I agree, there was a whole lot less shit coming from his mouth 'back in the day'.
But things have changed a lot since his day, political Islam reared it's ugly fascist head, the word slipped into war, and American right wing Christianity found its voice.
[b][i][size=22]Hello sweetie !
-
lpg Some parts of sharia law have already been introduced legally. Interest is prohibited in Islam so there are islamic banks, which are completely legit.
. . . and always have been, no legislation was needed, no new laws drawn or established laws modified (although a couple were reinterpreted).
Example:
if a religion dictates that any goods bought from a shop must be paid for - not in one go - but in three parts - (let's say for example that god says a £99 iPod must be paid for in three installments of £33 to honour the holy Trinity) - then Argos can offer this serivce to customers of that religion if it is not in conflict with existing law - which in my crap example it is not.
If a religion dictates that if a woman is caught buying goods with her 'husbands' money - she should have a finger removed - but this is in breach of existing law - it will not be accommodated.
It is in this context that we have sharia banking (on a vanishingly small scale).
It is 'legit' because it is legal.
- Interest is not really prohibited as such in Islamic jurisprudence, it a little more complicated than that, it has more to do with the sharing of risk.
- Interest is not really prohibited as such in Islamic jurisprudence, it a little more complicated than that, it has more to do with the sharing of risk.
-
tynan I do not recognize fascism as valid - therefore I have fascistic tendencies ?
Yes.
-
The point might be that the above 'money shot' is in breach of Sharia law.
The recent (failed) car bombs (someone may have to remind me of the date but it was sometime autumn-ish last year [EDIT On 29 June 2007]) were all placed outside of clubs running a 'ladies night' - it is no coincidence that this display of flesh is in breach of Sharia law, under Sharia law women must cover their bodies except for their hands and face. The reasoning behind this rule is that women are not to be viewed as sexual.
Those of us who think to adoption of even small tenets of a religious law is a bad thing are essentially on the side of the dancing girls.
-
the Archbishop of Cunterbury ^^^
-
tynan [quote]BringMeMyFix [quote]tynan I do not recognize fascism as valid - therefore I have fascistic tendencies ?
Yes.[/quote]
[/quote]I don't recognize the devil as valid, but that doesn't stop me having devilish tendencies :p
tynan
BringMeMyFix
lpg
chris_crash
rpm
hippy
big_daddy_wayne-
Post a reply
About
The Archbishop of Cantebury...
Posted by
@CHUG_IT
no such thing. the word you want is 'Heaven'.
the land of milk and honey makes religious people do good.