PostHeaderIcon The Essential Danger Of Religion

I will begin this by repeating one of my favorite notions… I am only one religion removed from the most fanatic believer. I say this because, inevitably, the truly fanatic are certain that every religious dogma, except their own, is fatally flawed. In a word, they are all wrong. All I do is take this idea one religion further and accept the obvious – that ALL religions are fatally flawed, ergo the one religion difference.

There are several very simple principles that convince me I am correct. The simplest of all is this: the root of all religions is nothing more or less than an attempt to explain the relationship between humanity and the unknowable. Unknowable. Think about this a moment. If something is truly unknowable, are not any and all attempts to find an explanation automatically flawed? None can be any better than wild guesses. Possibly, one or more of these wild guesses may be near some form of truth but we cannot know that with any certainty because that is the very nature of unknowable.

It follows (to my mind) that, given the absolute uncertainty of any dogma based on wild guesses, any attempt to use such dogma as justification for interfering in the free exercise of their natural rights by others can only be wrong. Very wrong. As wrong as wrong can get.

How could anything be simpler to comprehend? Yet, by the billions, we humans cling to belief systems that were not even convincing back in the dark ages when they were conceived. Belief systems that would be both silly and comical were it not for the damage they have done and continue to do.

Which brings us to marathon day in Boston. Once again, we are forced to see the result of a belief system that, by its own tenents, cannot, and will not peacefully coexist with any other system of belief or governance. Yet, we refuse to see that the problem is not a few over zealous practitioners of Islam. Instead, the problem is obviously in the core beliefs upon which the religion is based.

Why such a refusal? Simple. Once we, via our institutions, openly admit that the very tenents of a religion can be dangerous to humanity, we open the door to the next obvious question: “can this conclusion apply to all religions?”

At some level of our being, I think all of us know the answer to that question. That is why we do not dare allow it to be asked in any meaningful forum.

Think about it.

Troy L Robinson

One Response to “The Essential Danger Of Religion”

  • Well said, Troy. As you know, I have more tolerance for debate with religious fanatics than you do, and engage in the sport rather frequently. I often employ a similar argument by pointing out that we both agree that literally hundreds of gods do not exist, and that I just believe in one less than they do.

    Your conclusion is undoubtedly a significant component of the explanation for a couple of counterintuitive observations, which I have always found most curious. Piously Correct conservative Christian fundamentalists will say the most nasty things about Catholics, Mormons, and non-evangelical Protestant denominations, which are often Marxist oriented.

    They go so far as to claim their adherents are not even real Christians. Yet, they respect all of them more than a godless conservative, who agrees entirely with their rejection of those doctrines. Even more incongruently, they demonstrate more respect for Muslim aliens, than they do for godless Americans.

    I have always put it down to their apparent need to validate ‘faith’ itself, since, by its very nature, faith is a dubious proposition, fraught with doubt. Their worldview revolves around their faith, and they are quite content to argue over which god and/or dogma one ought to have faith in, or which prescribed moral code one ought to adopt, etc.

    Such squabbling just goes with the territory of organized religions, with competitive clerics ever striving to increase their tithing flocks. Each have their own pitch of features and benefits, rewards and punishment. Conversions are an acceptable way of keeping score, as long as everyone stays in the game.

    You win some and you lose some. It is the apostate, who loses faith and drops out of the game entirely that is intolerable. Organized religion is every bit as altruistic as Marxism. Both posit the welfare of the collective society as more important than that of any individual. Yet, man’s very nature is selfish. The Christians call it ‘Original Sin.’

    The survival instinct causes every rational human to always choose the alternative that produces the greatest pleasure or the least pain. The only way to get an individual to put the welfare of the group ahead of his own, is to somehow convince him that it ultimately is in his best (selfish) interest to do so. This requires serious indoctrination, and ongoing reinforcement.

    For some, who have accepted the authority of a moral code that is contrary to their nature, this produces a constant struggle to measure up to their accepted group’s ideals. Exposure to apostates, who seem to be enjoying a harmless, guiltless, faithless, and godless life, can be a serious challenge to their worldview and faith itself. It is a rather natural reaction to attack us. â—„Daveâ–º

Leave a Reply

Political Spectrum
Political Circle

Think Up/Down not Left/Right

Internal Links