Let's do some rough math. 6.5 billion people in the world. Maybe only half are religious? That's 3.25 billion. Let's say that only 1% are crazy enough to die for their cause (or would never be happy if their way weren't the only way)... that leaves about 32 million people. Or plenty to mess things up for the rest of us.
I'm writing this because of the incredibly divisive rhetoric that come spewing forth from the mouths of many religious leaders. What good will come of this? What happens when enough people have been brainwashed into thinking that hellfire and damnation await an 'immoral' society, when what is 'moral' is based on interpretation of an archaic text?
It's utterly absurd to think that the 'will of God' would be anything but the continuation of life on Earth. We, after all, know only one thing with certainty: we're here. It's hard to contest. If you weren't 'here', how else would you respond? So there exists very little merit in ranting and raving about the depravity and immorality of others while we're only really certain about this one thing: now exists. There's no guarantee of heaven. There's no guarantee of hell. But there is the guarantee that we can royally screw things up 'here'.
The disease of the typical religious mind is blind, unquestioning faith and an unshakable, intellectually dishonest belief in an imaginary friend (who will quickly throw a temper tantrum if you get one step out of line). What's better, although, by definition, there can be only one of these imaginary friends (it's all encompassing, all knowing, ever-present... so there's probably only room for one). Even if there can be only one, everyone claims that they know the right one. I'd suggest taking a step back and looking at our aggregated descriptions of this imaginary friend. If there's only one, and most would admit this, wouldn't it stand that (whatever you worship) (if there can only be one) you're worshiping the same imaginary thing? People!
Now, queue the rabid, holier-than-thou Christian youth group comments: yes, there can be only one, but to Truly know that one you must have a relationship with Christ! Alright. What's Christ? God's messenger, let's say (yes, his 'son', you say, but let's ignore that distinction for a bit... especially since this 'son' says that we're all 'children of God', hence ignoring the title 'son'... since there's a lot of these 'sons' among the 'children of God). That's perfectly acceptable. We know God through the descriptions of others. It can sure help. A blind man touching an elephant would be in direct contact with said beast, but would probably be hard-pressed to come up with an accurate description. Someone else can help explain. And that explanation will either resonate or it won't. We all have differing levels of knowledge.
But Jesus being the sole gate-keeper for Truth? I think someone made the classic 'mistaking the finger for the moon' error somewhere down the line. It's not like Truth is some exclusive, Christian-only nightclub with Jesus serving as the uber-discerning bodyguard whose sole purpose it is to kick Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Taoists, Zoroastrians, Jews, Wiccans, Atheists, Agnostics, Native/Indigenous People, and assorted other 'non-believers' to the curb (and by curb I mean fires which burn hotter than an infinite amount of infinite suns and serve the sole purpose of torturing the souls of the damned for all eternity). Something is wrong with this picture.
Possibly this 'wrong' feeling comes from the description of God as a 'loving' kinda dude. Someone powerful enough to create an entire universe (try pulling *that* off... it's hard to get something out of nothing... unless you're a politician or gossip columnist, but I digress). Someone powerful enough to know everything about every decision that ever could (or couldn't be made) but still powerful enough to grant free will. So powerful that he could make a rock too heavy for himself to lift then immediately realize that he was God and transcend this self-imposed barrier. Oh, and he's very jealous, by the way. So jealous he'll kill you with lightning for wondering what that girl that sits next to you in math looks like naked... or if she's any good at... sports?
So, to use my favorite internet acronym: WTF? OMG LOL! FWIW, IMHO, something has to give. And that's just the particular stand of Christian insanity that I've discussed. Let's not forget that equally ignorant and radical people can be members of any religion. And there could be a lot of them.
I propose a new religion, since we've managed to mess it up pretty well so far. This religion wouldn't depend upon anything supernatural or non-existent. It would be something that any sentient being could believe and benefit from. There would be no illusions or lies (those could be bundled separately as Expansion Packs, but not essential to the Core). It'd start with something along the lines of 'People of the world, whether or not God exists, there are probably things that can be done and agreed upon by all that would make everything work much more smoothly...' Then it would launch into a concise set of 'rules of thumb' that we could all more or less agree to. It wouldn't be 3,000 pages long, since anything that needs that many pages can't be True. Truth is much simpler and sweeter. This thing would only take 10 or so pages. And the bulk of it could be summarized in a 1-page cheat sheet that can be easily posted and skimmed.
...well, it may be naive, but it beats the hell out of the upcoming War of Religions. Well, it's your choice. I'm set... I've got plenty of popcorn.
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
Very cool entry. Funny, somewhat lighthearted, somewhat serious, demanding....all very well done for an entry about *gasp* religion.
Your proposal at the end sound interesting. We meet on Tuesdays. (just kidding, obviously. The Expansion packers meet on tuesdays!)
~ *~
Visit my blog! I'll even provide a link for ya:
Comments are always appreciated! :)
No! We'll meet Sundays. And it will be a capital offense to even *think* about working on this day... and this is by no means an arbitrary day ;-)
Maybe I'll draft up a version of this Radical Humanism and post it within a few days. I'll try to be more tactful about it... maybe we'll even get the Christians to admit that it could work :-)
Ha! Good one. But the Christians admit to nothing. They still think Jesus was a snow-white male.
We'll have a Bake Sale on Thursday to raise funds for the plasma cannon.
~ *~
This is a signature, an automated thingy that pops up when I comment, not a demand to see my blog!
Mind Control is Easier Than You Think
First of all, I resent your statement that the majority of religious people are insane, and ranting about hellfire and damnation. That is not the majority, just the loudest. Most people I know who are religious, do not claim to be holier than thou, and I certainly never have. I have been to my fair share of churches, and while I have met people I disagree with or are passionate about their cause, I have never met anyone that told me I was worse than them for the way I believe. I know there are people like that, but I would be willing to discuss it with them if there comes a day that I do run into a case like that.
Yes, Christains do not know for sure that their is a heaven or hell, or who is going there. But we have something called faith. We believe that our way is the right way, and if we didn't, we wouldn't be practicing it. I wouldn't be offended that you called my god, not to mention the god of anyone else who is religious or believs there is a god (these two are not necessarily the same thing) by telling us we believe in an imaginary friend. If I die believing that I will get into Heaven and see my deceased relatives again, and all that happens is I end up underneath a pile of dirt for eternity, who do I hurt? Not even myself, because I died happily, and I'll never know the difference.
Finally, you have no idea that you are right. You cannot prove that there is no god or anything past this life. for all you know, I am right. And by ranting and generalizing, I do not see how you can claim to be so much better than preachers who stand up and shout about how the whole world is going to Hell.
Sorry about any misunderstanding! I by no means believe that 'most' religious people are the special sort of crazy that I alluded to in the article. I'd refer you back to the first paragraph--where you'll find your clarification--where I said that our *rough* math figured that 1% of 50% of the population could be deemed 'crazy'. That means 50 out of 100 people could be considered 'somewhat religious' and of those 50 people, exactly 1/2 of a person would be 'crazy'. Not 'most', by any means :-)
And you're absolutely right: I have no idea if I'm right or not. But I happen to have one thing on my side: logic and pragmatism. I said it's immaterial whether someone chooses to believe in God or not... what matters, and what we can all agree upon, is that *we* exist. If you'd like to debate that matter, I'm sure we won't get very far... that which doesn't exist would have a hard time debating whether or not exists on account of its... well, nonexistence :-)
All I'm saying is that we can do better as a species. We can set aside petty differences and agree on a 'human religion', so to speak. This would be transcendent of 'faith' in something that may or may not exist, and put faith to better use: a faith in human destiny, and, thus, the destiny of all life. It's something of the 'stewardship' role that you'll find mentioned in the Bible. It's a waste of time praying to something that may or may not exist... much better to spend time in faithful living by helping others and keeping the world functioning right. There's no incentive for someone to value this life if they don't view it as all they have. If it's viewed as all they know they have, there's much less of a 'God will make things alright' attitude and more of a 'well, whether God exists or not, I'm going to do my part' attitude.
I figured this topic could spark some outrage, and it looks like we're through the first bout of it. I didn't intend to incite this kind of reaction... the actual goal was much simple: why not unite humanity with a shared vision and a 'faith' that everyone can see... and leave the 'imaginary' part up to those that wish it... but not using it as a way to divide.
Counterpoint? ;-)
"The disease of the typical religious mind is blind, unquestioning faith and an unshakable, intellectually dishonest belief in an imaginary friend (who will quickly throw a temper tantrum if you get one step out of line)."
this was what I was reffering to, where you talk about the typical religious mind.
I understand the part about a uniting religion for all of humanity. I do believe philosophers have tried the same thing, although perhaps not calling it a religion. I do believe that we need something to unite us, rather than divide. However, I do not think we should stop practicing our separate religions, which you did mention.
And of course, we shouldn't sit idly by and pray, hoping things might get changed. Things get changed by taking action. I work hard for what I want, as most people do. I don't think you'll find many people who believe that they will get everything they want in life by praying, and nothing else. When I pray, it is usually for confidence, or because I want to talk to someone, but not someone who is going to say anything back.
I value the life I have, as most religious and non-religious people do. Even though I do believe in life after death, I have this life right now. I have rewards to look forward to in this life before than. I don't want to waste what I have now. Perhaps if we took a look at what we have in common, rather than differences, we wouldn't have so much trouble in the world.
I agree with the majority of your blog, but being Catholic myself, I have to note one thing. Logic can be used on both sides of the religious fence. There are several highly intelligent scientists that are constantly discovering that science and religion compliment each other. (The Tao of Physics, just off the top of my head). There are just as many (or more) that will state that science and logic will end religion as a whole. Which would be a shame, since there have been people that have done WONDERFUL selfless acts that have bettered humanity as a whole in the name of thier faiths.
Mother Theresa, Mahatma Ghandi, Buddha, Solomon, Muhammad and My Lord Jesus Christ.
Even if all of them come from different theological backgrounds, don't you think the world is a better place for having them walked it? I do.
And yes there are some fundies out there that have truly fucked up in the name whatever god they choose to follow. Its a shame, but I personally believe that the acts of charity, kindness, and benevolence must outweigh the evil that they have perpetrated. To think otherwise will lead you down a dark road populated by dipshits, and suicide bombers. That was probably redundant.
Anyone can start a religion.... (oh how I know this is just going to piss someone off) just look at Smith and Brigham Young. Then a worse case.... Heavens Gate. Lets just hope that the next major religion that gets started doesnt require its disiples to drink koolaid in thier new Puma's.
~~~><~~~
"One of the things that draws writers to writing, is that they can get things right that they got wrong in real life, by writing about them"
~ Tobias Wolffe
voted you a five, I really do dig your style
~~~><~~~
"One of the things that draws writers to writing, is that they can get things right that they got wrong in real life, by writing about them"
~ Tobias Wolffe