Religion was supposed to keep humans in Line; But humans are now wanting to keep Religion in Line

The title gives a good idea of what i want to discuss but let me elaborate a bit.
Religion was always setting a standard so that people have a organised life not giving in to desires that may harm themselves, others or the society.
Now its people who want to define religion to suit their convinience, even want religion to actually have more room for their desires.
Religion has more become a label. People want to be called religious rather than BE religious.
In short when people do something wrong according to religion they want the religion to declare that its ok and "they are not wrong, its just the 21st century"
.
And its not a thread to question the morals of any religion, just assume they are perfect even if you 'know' how they are. Assume, ignore and concentrate on the human faults rather than religion.
Discuss!

Well, I think that it is possible to have a more positive religion than the current incarnation of hard-line Christianity in the U.S., maybe we need a new prophet and an overhaul. They usually show up every 2,000 years.

Originally posted by logical7

Religion was always setting a standard so that people have a organised life not giving in to desires that may harm themselves, others or the society.

Read some history. Religion has never, ever imbued a human being with morality. In fact, a lot of historic atrocities can be traced to the perpetrator's religious zeal (Crusades are just one example of millions)


Even today, some of our most corrupt are some of our most "religious." A priest who rapes children and a Satanist who rapes children are both monsters cut from the same cloth, regardless of who they think they're praying to

Humans can't even keep themselves in line most of the time.. With the way things are today, religion doesn't stand a chance either.

Originally posted by Hawking

Originally posted by logical7

Religion was always setting a standard so that people have a organised life not giving in to desires that may harm themselves, others or the society.

Read some history. Religion has never, ever imbued a human being with morality. In fact, a lot of historic atrocities can be traced to the perpetrator's religious zeal (Crusades are just one example of millions)


Even today, some of our most corrupt are some of our most "religious." A priest who rapes children and a Satanist who rapes children are both monsters cut from the same cloth, regardless of who they think they're praying to

edit on 6-12-2012 by Hawking because: (no reason given)

well i agree with you, but that again is human fault, people can use even religions for selfish motives. Lets not go there!

reply to post by Hawking

Read some history. Religion has never, ever imbued a human being with morality. In fact, a lot of historic atrocities can be traced to the perpetrator's religious zeal (Crusades are just one example of millions)

Are you saying that no religion has ever created, influenced or helped mold the morality of an individual who's been indoctrinated?

You don't think that the Templar's morality and their rationalizations that lead to their actions were derived from their position, comprehension and allegiance's with religious texts?

I'm not trying to generalize... so I guess.. it would be easier if you were to further define what you mean

Originally posted by darkbake
Well, I think that it is possible to have a more positive religion than the current incarnation of hard-line Christianity in the U.S., maybe we need a new prophet and an overhaul. They usually show up every 2,000 years.

interesting thought.
I must say, christianity does have a system but it has been abandoned, Jesus pbuh dint give a new religion, he just corrected the errors that had crept into judaism. It was never Love, follow secular law and party hard. It was Love and dont you dare break any commandments.

reply to post by MESSAGEFROMTHESTARS


If you are a "good person" because of a fear of punishment (Hell) or the promise of reward (Heaven), that is not the same as having a conscience or having empathy for others.


Many religious people have empathy, many do not.

Many secularists have empathy, and many do not.


Religion has nothing to do with having a conscience or empathy.

Originally posted by Hawking
reply to post by MESSAGEFROMTHESTARS

 

If you are a "good person" because of a fear of punishment (Hell) or the promise of reward (Heaven), that is not the same as having a conscience or having empathy for others.


Many religious people have empathy, many do not.

Many secularists have empathy, and many do not.


Religion has nothing to do with having a conscience or empathy.

people with empathy thinking that they are better because they have it will give rise to ego.
What makes some have it and some dont? Does upbringing plays a part? Or genes?
Its about setting up a system that encourages empathy.
What would you say of a society where its ok to be a bully and tease a girl with a bit different looking ears, and the victim girl is offered surgery to 'HELP' her? Thats the worst help that can be given. But ofcourse there is a big cosmetic industry to 'HELP' these victims who are ugly and better get help.
.
I am not here to say it should be a religious system. But there should be a system. The secular one is failing and people are also pulling down the religious one which has at least some answers.

reply to post by logical7

Now its people who want to define religion to suit their convinience, even want religion to actually have more room for their desires.
Religion has more become a label. People want to be called religious rather than BE religious.
In short when people do something wrong according to religion they want the religion to declare that its ok and "they are not wrong, its just the 21st century"

I think it's about justification. One of my "issues" this go-round (I believe in reincarnation for now) is feeling like I need to "explain myself."

People use religion to squelch their fears of the unknown (death and its aftermath - if any), and also to "prop up" their behavior as well. If the two are irreconcilable, the attitude or actions must change, or people feel too much "freedom".

No one likes to feel guilty, and no one likes to be punished (at least not normal people who don't have dominatrix or sadomasochistic issues). NO ONE likes to be reprimanded, shamed, etc.

Religion serves as a template for behavioral standards. MOST normal people have SOME KIND of inner compass, or internalized sense of right/wrong, good/bad. But, SOME DO NOT, and they need religion to keep themselves in line. Unfortunately, fear of being "punished" is not a good reason to be "good." It works, though.

Some people need rules posted to live by. Others have developed the capacity to self-regulate. Those who self-regulate without religion are threatening to those who need it.....

interesting thread. S/F!

Originally posted by Hawking
A priest who rapes children and a Satanist who rapes children are both monsters cut from the same cloth, regardless of who they think they're praying to

... and which religion was Jerry Sandusky a priest in, again?

The vast majority of child molesters are not priests, and I've never heard anyone say that priests or pastors who are molesters are "molesting for God," so what's your point?

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by logical7

 

Now its people who want to define religion to suit their convinience, even want religion to actually have more room for their desires.
Religion has more become a label. People want to be called religious rather than BE religious.
In short when people do something wrong according to religion they want the religion to declare that its ok and "they are not wrong, its just the 21st century"

I think it's about justification. One of my "issues" this go-round (I believe in reincarnation for now) is feeling like I need to "explain myself."

People use religion to squelch their fears of the unknown (death and its aftermath - if any), and also to "prop up" their behavior as well. If the two are irreconcilable, the attitude or actions must change, or people feel too much "freedom".

No one likes to feel guilty, and no one likes to be punished (at least not normal people who don't have dominatrix or sadomasochistic issues). NO ONE likes to be reprimanded, shamed, etc.

Religion serves as a template for behavioral standards. MOST normal people have SOME KIND of inner compass, or internalized sense of right/wrong, good/bad. But, SOME DO NOT, and they need religion to keep themselves in line. Unfortunately, fear of being "punished" is not a good reason to be "good." It works, though.

Some people need rules posted to live by. Others have developed the capacity to self-regulate. Those who self-regulate without religion are threatening to those who need it.....

interesting thread. S/F!

self-regulate?? hmmmm....
how they get their standard? its obviously better than the unregulated ones but my objection is how can they claim to be self regulated? cant anyone claim it? and maybe not regulated or just partially so?

reply to post by logical7

cant anyone claim it? and maybe not regulated or just partially so?

Are you a parent logical7? (I'm guessing not yet, as you explained you're currently engaged to be married).

When you have a child, that you wanted to have (or even if the child is a "surprise" but you welcome it), you feel this natural instinct to protect it, keep it alive, address its needs/crying, and you don't give a TOSS about what you wanted to do (for example, sleep )....

it kicks in automatically. Feels like magic. Even people who think they really didn't "want" to be a parent find themselves overwhelmed with the urge to care for it once it arrives. You want to do right by the child, to step up and see to its well-being, health, and survival.

As the child grows, and begins to develop into a more functioning, thinking person (for example, taking first steps toward walking, but falling down a lot) it's SUPER NATURAL to encourage them, to applaud them and beam at them for things they've achieved. To smile at them, touch them, let them know they are PRECIOUS and are your first priority.

That kind of love eventually becomes internalized by the child; lending them self-esteem, a sense of importance, and reciprocity of caring for the parent (WAY before they are "conscious" or "self-regulating") and for others.

Sharing and obedience come later, but its the LOVE, the unquestioning, unconditional LOVE, that matters. When your child is hurting (either a banged knee, a loss of a prize possession, or mistreated by others), you become FIERCELY protective want to jump in and help, to stop their pain.
You can't, of course, as they get older and are out in society....and the heartache watching your child suffer is excruciating, even if they brought it on themselves (learned from experience).

This protective, nurturing, healthy parenting is - in my opinion - what GOD is meant to be for everyone. Not some authoritarian, confusing overlord who is moody, may become wrathful and harm you, won't tell you the rules or might change them without notice, OR what punishment or reward to expect for "misbehaving."

Hope that makes sense.

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by logical7

 

cant anyone claim it? and maybe not regulated or just partially so?

Are you a parent logical7? (I'm guessing not yet, as you explained you're currently engaged to be married).

When you have a child, that you wanted to have (or even if the child is a "surprise" but you welcome it), you feel this natural instinct to protect it, keep it alive, address its needs/crying, and you don't give a TOSS about what you wanted to do (for example, sleep

)....

it kicks in automatically. Feels like magic. Even people who think they really didn't "want" to be a parent find themselves overwhelmed with the urge to care for it once it arrives. You want to do right by the child, to step up and see to its well-being, health, and survival.

As the child grows, and begins to develop into a more functioning, thinking person (for example, taking first steps toward walking, but falling down a lot) it's SUPER NATURAL to encourage them, to applaud them and beam at them for things they've achieved. To smile at them, touch them, let them know they are PRECIOUS and are your first priority.

That kind of love eventually becomes internalized by the child; lending them self-esteem, a sense of importance, and reciprocity of caring for the parent (WAY before they are "conscious" or "self-regulating") and for others.

Sharing and obedience come later, but its the LOVE, the unquestioning, unconditional LOVE, that matters. When your child is hurting (either a banged knee, a loss of a prize possession, or mistreated by others), you become FIERCELY protective want to jump in and help, to stop their pain.
You can't, of course, as they get older and are out in society....and the heartache watching ot yechild suffer is excruciating, even if they brought it on themselves (learned from experience).

This protective, nurturing, healthy parenting is - in my opinion - what GOD is meant to be for everyone. Not some authoritarian, confusing overlord who is moody, may become wrathful and harm you, won't tell you the rules or might change them without notice, OR what punishment or reward to expect for "misbehaving."

Hope that makes sense.

makes a lot of sense and i am eager to have kids but not yet.
but if i take that analogy then how the communication works? does God contacts?

reply to post by logical7

the biggest humanity fault is that it thinks it knows everything !
but he is just following his conjecture !!
the only thing it knows well is that he will not live in this world forever !!!

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by logical7

 

Now its people who want to define religion to suit their convinience, even want religion to actually have more room for their desires.
Religion has more become a label. People want to be called religious rather than BE religious.
In short when people do something wrong according to religion they want the religion to declare that its ok and "they are not wrong, its just the 21st century"

I think it's about justification.

No one likes to feel guilty, and no one likes to be punished (at least not normal people who don't have dominatrix or sadomasochistic issues). NO ONE likes to be reprimanded, shamed, etc.

Religion serves as a template for behavioral standards. MOST normal people have SOME KIND of inner compass, or internalized sense of right/wrong, good/bad. But, SOME DO NOT, and they need religion to keep themselves in line. Unfortunately, fear of being "punished" is not a good reason to be "good." It works, though.

Some people need rules posted to live by. Others have developed the capacity to self-regulate. Those who self-regulate without religion are threatening to those who need it.....

Threatening huh? I don't feel threatened by athiests at all, in fact I'm here to reprimand anybody, be they religious or not , who either are ignorant or lying. One thing I dislike about this place is the constant lumping of everyone or "NO ONE" into the same pathetic litterbox, because I for ONE do like to be corrected, I'm here because I'm up to the challenge of helping others who want help, to help them scratch that itch for more insight, and I find that people who take the bible seriously to be more logical.
Yes, people do seek justification, there is nothing wrong with that, unless your willing to be ignorant or a liar to get it. I'm here to correct your ignorance, you may think that's arrogant of me, but from my perspective (which is just as valid) I think you're arrogant as well for assuming that NO ONE likes to be reprimanded, you speak about rules as though they are not necessary, as though children "self-regulate". What people believe to be their "inner compass" or what I call 'priorities' is actually learned behavior. Duh right?
By the way, your use of the word 'dominatrix' is what I'd describe your avatar as.
How can one become humble without humiliation or if they are afraid to or unable to feel shame?
Punishment is not a threat, it's a promise, no matter who you are or where you go, you're liable to be punished for some reason or another, either as children or as adults.
By the way I'm sorry if I came off too offensive, you are not alone, I tend to offend myself as well.
I like what you wrote about parenting, although I do not believe in unconditional love as I just can't wrap my mind around that word 'unconditional' because to my 'scientific' mind, there are conditions to everything, it's what gives everything it's distinct name and wording.
Though I do understand exactly what you said about people who think they don't want kids and then flip flop heart change through the experience of giving birth and holding newborn baby, because that was the case with me. I did have to question, why would God give someone like me such a great responsability? How could God trust that I'd "train your child in the way they should go, so that when they grow up they'll never forsake it."
Of course there are many people who believe that people who believe in God should be barred from having children because they think that the child will grow up to be a murderous unloving disrespectful person. Well is there anyone whose murderous unloving and disrespectful that DOESN'T come across "a bible thumper" every now and then? Is ANYONE "safe" from these religious folk? I don't think so, so there has to be some other correlation am I wrong? I mean, there must be a couple people out there who don't give a damn about religion who commit crimes...right?

reply to post by wildtimes


Nice avatar change wildtimes. Those robots in your previous one weren't so great.
As for the title of this thread, I don't trust organized religion.