Religion: Good or Bad?

[Naamah D.]

I don't have a religion because they have way too many rules. I want to live a free, happy life without having to abide by some religious code. So I consider myself on the fence about believing in an actual god. If there is a god good. If there is isn't a god, I'm perfectly comfortable with that. I won't know until I see it.

 

Due to my fascination with demonic creatures my brother has jokingly(or at least I hope he's joking)said that I'm Satanist, but once again too many rules.

[Zooba]

Like some people have already mentioned: a bad religious person will still be a bad person if you somehow convince them to become an atheist. Religion in and of itself preaches basic morality (in my opinion, I realize a lot of people don't agree with it) and I believe that without religion, the world would not be a better place.

 

As for the arguments that people pick and choose etc., well that isn't religion's fault, thats the person's fault. Not that I'm judging them either, we've got a phrase that they say a lot where I'm from: You've got your sins, and I've got mine. Basically, you can't judge a person for doing something that is considered a sin in their religion, because most probably you also commit sins, who gets to decide if your sins are better or worse than another persons.

 

Also, I don't think it's mere coincidence that all of the world's major religions preach the same basic concepts, have the same things that the consider sins, have variations of the same "biblical" stories (Noah's ark, Adam and Eve, etc.)

 

At the same time, I get that some people don't like religion, and tbh I don't care what happens to their souls, they can do and believe whatever the hell they like as long as it isn't affecting me.

 

I do get annoyed when people who pick and choose bits of religion to follow decide that it's okay for them to go around and tell everyone that they're version of religion is better than another, or to justify the sins they choose to do...if you want to sin, go ahead, but don't tell me that I'm wrong for not committing the same sins you choose to commit.

 

I also get annoyed when people (mostly online) bash religion, and I mean bashing, not discussion or debate, no, full on, caps-lock, excessive punctuation bashing. I'm not a christian, but when I see people bashing christianity or judaisim or islam....it all feels just as bad to me. And the disappointing thing is that a lot of people somehow believe that just because they don't believe something, it makes it okay for them to talk **** about it. Calling religion brain-washing, calling people who have a religion idiots....*sigh* it hurts a lot of people, and I don't think people realize that.

 

In the end no religion can dictate whether a person is a jerk or not. And what a lot of people overlook is that there are non-religious terrorist groups out there too (KKK anyone?) I don't doubt there are more, but religious terrorism 'sells' better.

[passiflora]

Like some people have already mentioned: a bad religious person will still be a bad person if you somehow convince them to become an atheist. Religion in and of itself preaches basic morality (in my opinion, I realize a lot of people don't agree with it) and I believe that without religion, the world would not be a better place.

 

As for the arguments that people pick and choose etc., well that isn't religion's fault, thats the person's fault. Not that I'm judging them either, we've got a phrase that they say a lot where I'm from: You've got your sins, and I've got mine. Basically, you can't judge a person for doing something that is considered a sin in their religion, because most probably you also commit sins, who gets to decide if your sins are better or worse than another persons.

 

Also, I don't think it's mere coincidence that all of the world's major religions preach the same basic concepts, have the same things that the consider sins, have variations of the same "biblical" stories (Noah's ark, Adam and Eve, etc.)

 

I won't deny that even without religion there would still bad people, but I think it's also reasonable to say that some "bad" religious people would be a lot better if they hadn't been raised in a religious environment.

 

Religions may teach the same basic concepts of morality, but they're all pretty much things that can be derived by simply thinking about the consequences of certain actions and choosing what gives the best outcome (e.g. the least amount of harm). The problem arises when religion teaches things that go above and beyond 'basic' morality.

 

Religious values tend to change over time - one could say they adapt to secular morality, not the other way around. For example, we tend to think slavery is wrong, but [to the best of my knowledge] there's very little if any religious motivation for this view (e.g. the Bible doesn't prohibit slavery, even though people use it to argue both directions).

 

As another example, some religions are adapting to become more tolerant of homosexuality and gay marriage. I've never heard a viable secular reason against gay marriage; the debate is almost entirely religiously motivated. It's one example of harm that wouldn't otherwise exist.

 

We can say with a fairly high degree of certainty that portions of many religious texts are poetic/metaphorical in nature. Religion by it's very nature is a "pick and choose" kind of deal because 1) people disagree on which parts are metaphorical and which parts are literal, and 2) interpretation of the metaphorical parts varies significantly. It can undoubtedly end up resulting in "good" - and that's awesome when it does - however, it still doesn't provide a clear concept of morality, which IMO is dangerous.

 

 

(Not trying to dissuade you from your own religion or anything, I just think morality is fascinating!)

[lilshadowdweller]

Religion is bad. It divides us. Sure, at one point, religion served some purpose; Ie; some rituals were actually beneficial to us and were easier explained by religion (like sacrificing a goat or sheep to a God, which really was actually an act of culling; a good thing for a herd), it also offered explanations as to why things were the way they were. (Ie; God created the Earth, Women were doomed to have a painful child birth because of Eve tempting Adam into betraying God, serpents crawl on their bellies as punishment for motivating Eve to not listen to God's will) but now, having actual facts and knowledge, we know how things actually work! The Earth isn't flat like the Bible stated, it's round. Serpents don't crawl because of evolution; it became more convenient for them to not have legs. Childbirth is mostly painful due to us evolving into a species where we walked on two legs. The Moon isn't a separate light; it's merely casting the Sun's light.

 

Oh, sure, religion influenced many things. It helped establish a lot of our culture. It gave people a reason to co-operate and be a part of a community.

 

But we can't turn a blind eye to the wars it has created, and yes, extreme people are everywhere, but within these wars, those weren't extremists. Those were normal people believing in their Faith.

 

I also can't turn a blind eye to those Christians/religious people who are trying to halt homosexual marriage. Or to the Catholics who have allowed so many children to be sexually abused.

 

I'm not religious. I'm happy. Why follow someone else's path when you can establish your own? Good and evil is a human creation, we think of God as the mediator, but all along, it's been us.

 

I also don't deny some people have done some good things in the name of Faith. But many have done good things without faith; and who is more remarkable? The people who do good because they think it'll give them heaven and they'll avoid the torture of hell, or the people who do good without a God, and anticipate no reward/punishment for doing so?

[Zooba]

@passiflora I honestly don't think it would matter the presence or lack of religion a bad person is raised in, what matters is how they were raised. Terrorism and murder and rape are all sins, in all religions, does that mean that when a "religious person" does them in the name of religion, the religion actually supports the sin "under those circumstances". It doesn't, it just means that the way that person was raised, they've been taught that that is okay. I dunno if I explained it well, but it all goes down to proper parents instilling the correct morals in their child.

 

Personally, I think the morals taught by religion are correct, and they're the most effective. If you don't think that God is watching you, what's to stop you from committing crimes? The law? What's a more powerful motivator, punishment from mortals or punishment from an all-knowing all-powerful God? I think it's more effective (when the rules are followed correctly, which they usually aren't) at reducing crime than encouraging people to rely on their own judgement. Not everyone has the same basic instincts when it comes to right and wrong, that's why criminals exist.

 

I get that not everyone thinks the morals taught by religion are right, but to each his/her own :)

[The Bandit]

There are a lot of comments on here saying religion is overall a bad thing, which makes me sad, especially when pretty much all religions were started with the aim of making the world a better place. I can see where people are coming from, a huge amount of bad stuff has been done in the name of religion, from Muslim terrorists today, going all the way back to Christianity and the Crusades, and also the Catholic suppression of scientists like Galileo.

 

However, looking at my own country, the UK, I firmly believe that without Christianity it would be a far worse place than it is today. Our historical legal system and laws are basically based on the Bible. A significant amount of the first hospitals and decent schools were started by Christians, and the abolition of the Slave Trade and the setting up of fair working practices in Victorian Times was also down to Christians like Shaftesbury and Wilberforce. Even today, a lot of the best charities are run by Christians or have Christian foundations.

 

Fundamentally, I don't like thinking about my 'religion', Christianity', as a 'religion' at all - it should be about having a relationship with God. It's when people start forgetting what God wants, and making it what they want, with all the traditions and rules and regulations, that the problems begin.

[lilshadowdweller]

Personally, I think the morals taught by religion are correct, and they're the most effective. If you don't think that God is watching you, what's to stop you from committing crimes? The law? What's a more powerful motivator, punishment from mortals or punishment from an all-knowing all-powerful God? I think it's more effective (when the rules are followed correctly, which they usually aren't) at reducing crime than encouraging people to rely on their own judgement. Not everyone has the same basic instincts when it comes to right and wrong, that's why criminals exist.

 

So, you're saying that without a God, people aren't inherently "good"? Again, I repeat my question: Who is morally good? The person who does good deeds without fear of a God or reward, or the person who does good for fear of a fiery fate at the hands of God? And keep in mind MANY criminals are Christians....

 

 

I get that not everyone thinks the morals taught by religion are right, but to each his/her own :)

 

So....you think slavery is good? I've provided you some examples;

 

However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)

 

And here's a passage from the "New Testament" conding slavery;

 

Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Timothy 6:1-2 NLT)

 

 

You think inequality between sexes are good?

 

Lev 20:13

• 
  If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death; their blood is upon them.
  

 

All of these things are actually supported by the Bible, and I bet you don't think any of those are good at all! (I surely hope you do not.) But you only pick the good ones: Don't steal, don't murder (UNLESS God gives you permission to, as the Bible states), don't sleep with your neighbours loved one, ect.

 

You can't follow only the good and state that the "bad" isn't relevant...if you're going to follow your Faith, you should do so fully, otherwise, you're basically making your own religion anyway.

 

Which is what all religious people do. I know so many Muslims who drink alcohol, a direct wrong in their Faith, but they ignore it because they consider it silly. I know christians who don't participate in Lent - another thing that should be followed.

 

If all of you are really only doing good to appease a God, I'm scared! You can't be good folks without God?

 

Now, this is just Christianity, but lots of other religions (Quaran, too) displays violence and inequality. Essentially the Bible had some good things in it, but not all of it was so. In fact, a lot of it wasn't.

[Finn the Human]

So, you're saying that without a God, people aren't inherently "good"? Again, I repeat my question: Who is morally good? The person who does good deeds without fear of a God or reward, or the person who does good for fear of a fiery fate at the hands of God? And keep in mind MANY criminals are Christians....

 

 

 

So....you think slavery is good? I've provided you some examples;

 

 

 

And here's a passage from the "New Testament" conding slavery;

 

 

 

 

You think inequality between sexes are good?

 

 

 

All of these things are actually supported by the Bible, and I bet you don't think any of those are good at all! (I surely hope you do not.) But you only pick the good ones: Don't steal, don't murder (UNLESS God gives you permission to, as the Bible states), don't sleep with your neighbours loved one, ect.

 

You can't follow only the good and state that the "bad" isn't relevant...if you're going to follow your Faith, you should do so fully, otherwise, you're basically making your own religion anyway.

 

Which is what all religious people do. I know so many Muslims who drink alcohol, a direct wrong in their Faith, but they ignore it because they consider it silly. I know christians who don't participate in Lent - another thing that should be followed.

 

If all of you are really only doing good to appease a God, I'm scared! You can't be good folks without God?

 

Now, this is just Christianity, but lots of other religions (Quaran, too) displays violence and inequality. Essentially the Bible had some good things in it, but not all of it was so. In fact, a lot of it wasn't.

A religion is there to guide you. I think it tells what is right from wrong and it makes the world a better place. Please keep in mind that god himself did not write these religious books but it was humans so there might be some flaws. Religion teaches ethics and it depends whether you understand it, or you don't. I also find it offensive that

And keep in mind MANY criminals are Christians....

^This statement is hurtful because not people from one religion are criminals. The way you said it seemed like you meant most criminals are Christian.

[~Xandria]

Religion has definitely done more bad than good.

 

That is NOT to say that it has not done good, and that is NOT to say that the people who misuse religion would have such perfect morals if only they were atheists. On a small scale, a lot of religions are fantastic. On a larger scale, unfortunately, not so much.

 

The reason why religion has done more bad than good is because mostly, the people who make it bad are simply bad themselves. The same people would still be jerks if they were atheists. But take religion out of the mix, and those people are jerks without power. Take religion out, and you can't use religion to discriminate against others. Take away religion...who knows what terrorists of such-and-such religious persuasion would do? Perhaps they would still bomb in the name of something.

 

Take religion out of the mix, and science would be so much more advanced than it is now. Look at what happened to scientists throughout history--the church wouldn't just kill them; they would torture them. That's what happens when people get a hold of power. And when "the greatest being in the universe" is what's giving you power, when you are basing morals off of an arbitrary set of rules rather than on thinking things through, and when you tell people that faith is more important than thought, then you are far more likely to do some scary stuff. (Godwin's Law: YOU KNOW WHO ELSE DIDN'T QUESTION THEIR ORDERS FROM A SUPERIOR?)

 

What makes religion scary is that it takes out the thought process. You're told to obey stuff without thinking about why. If you think about stuff, BOOM--you're a witch! BURN HER! THAT'S why religion is damaging.

 

On a smaller scale, a lot of religious people--and their religious organizations--do a lot of good. I feel that these people would still BE good in their hearts if they were not religious. Those people are like me--they want to do good for the sake of doing good, not because God scares them into it. But the differences between them and me: they are part of a group, and they are stronger in that group. The love, the thought of God, the core of their religion uplifts them and inspires them. And in that way, religion is wonderful. I wish all religion could be like that.

You pretty much summed up my thoughts exactly. I know you posted this awhile back but I'm just now reading it. Very well said my friend. :)

[Welcome Back Apathy]

^This statement is hurtful because not people from one religion are criminals. The way you said it seemed like you meant most criminals are Christian.

 

If I'm reading it correctly, that statement was said in response to Christianity teaching morality and therefore wiping out crime. The comment it was in response to implied that you can't be good without God. In fact, however, most criminals in US prisons ARE Christian. But most people living in the US are Christian, so that would be why. Based on percent of the population, the numbers work out to each religion/atheism being equally good or bad.

[lilshadowdweller]

A religion is there to guide you. I think it tells what is right from wrong and it makes the world a better place. Please keep in mind that god himself did not write these religious books but it was humans so there might be some flaws. Religion teaches ethics and it depends whether you understand it, or you don't.

 

OK, now, which ethics do you follow? The Bible doesn't detail this. Which parts are written by man and which by God? Me telling you what the Bible problems does not equate to me "not understanding it". Actually, quite contrary, it seems that you're intrepreting your religion in your own manner....

 

I also find it offensive that

 

^This statement is hurtful because not people from one religion are criminals. The way you said it seemed like you meant most criminals are Christian.

 

 

 

Well, that was more in response to Zoomba's comment which went like this:

 

Not everyone has the same basic instincts when it comes to right and wrong, that's why criminals exist.

<-Which to me seems like an ironic statement, seeing as clearly people with reigious backgrounds DO commit crimes, and religion hasn't halted this. Many criminals have religions and have still done wrong.

[passiflora]

I also don't deny some people have done some good things in the name of Faith. But many have done good things without faith; and who is more remarkable? The people who do good because they think it'll give them heaven and they'll avoid the torture of hell, or the people who do good without a God, and anticipate no reward/punishment for doing so?

@passiflora I honestly don't think it would matter the presence or lack of religion a bad person is raised in, what matters is how they were raised. Terrorism and murder and rape are all sins, in all religions, does that mean that when a "religious person" does them in the name of religion, the religion actually supports the sin "under those circumstances". It doesn't, it just means that the way that person was raised, they've been taught that that is okay. I dunno if I explained it well, but it all goes down to proper parents instilling the correct morals in their child.

 

Personally, I think the morals taught by religion are correct, and they're the most effective. If you don't think that God is watching you, what's to stop you from committing crimes? The law? What's a more powerful motivator, punishment from mortals or punishment from an all-knowing all-powerful God? I think it's more effective (when the rules are followed correctly, which they usually aren't) at reducing crime than encouraging people to rely on their own judgement. Not everyone has the same basic instincts when it comes to right and wrong, that's why criminals exist.

Both of you may find it interesting that less religious people are more motivated by compassion than religious people, who may instead be more motivated by "doctrine, communal identity, or reputational concerns." Is one motivator stronger than the other? Is someone's motivation important if the outcome is the same? (I won't post my own answers to those questions, just food for thought. :P )

 

Zooba: I definitely agree that it's more about how someone is raised - just providing an example where I think religion does play a part. Regardless, if presence/lack of religion matters less than proper parenting, then is religion really that important for morality?

 

I don't think punishment in any form (mortal or by God) is a very good motivator at all. I would find it much more troubling to know all that's keeping someone from going on a crime spree is the belief in a deity, rather than reasoning out for themselves what is harmful and what isn't. I follow the law not because I'm afraid of going to jail, but because being a good person feels good and it benefits everyone. It doesn't take religion to know that if everyone just started breaking rules (or for example, if it wasn't against the law to kill each other), we wouldn't function well as a society for very long.

 

Fundamentally, I don't like thinking about my 'religion', Christianity', as a 'religion' at all - it should be about having a relationship with God. It's when people start forgetting what God wants, and making it what they want, with all the traditions and rules and regulations, that the problems begin.

The personal relationship thing is a nice thought, but Christians are quite specifically called to spread the gospel, and it's still a religion in every sense of the word.

 

Can we truly know what God wants? Every different denomination claims to have a monopoly on this knowledge, and feel that they're right in what they do. You're right that it's usually twisted to make it what they want and that it becomes problematic, and it's easy enough to dismiss them as "not true Christians." But if religion is still capable of producing that type of belief/behaviour, even if that's not how it's supposed to be, is it really a force of good?

[April]

But for individuals that believe, I think it's good for them. I think it's nice that they have something to believe in and to some people, the idea of dying and that just being it? That thought is paralyzing.

 

However, the way that religion has been used to determine what's right and wrong, especially when it comes to gay marriage, or abortion. That annoys me.

Not to mention that in my opinion, religion doesn't unite humanity, I think it tears it apart.

 

Overall, it's great for people to have something to believe in. Something to give them hope, or to ease the fear of passing. I just don't think it's good for them to try and force their beliefs on other people.

[Zooba]

So, you're saying that without a God, people aren't inherently "good"? Again, I repeat my question: Who is morally good? The person who does good deeds without fear of a God or reward, or the person who does good for fear of a fiery fate at the hands of God? And keep in mind MANY criminals are Christians....

 

Not "people" in general, but "Not everyone has the same basic instincts when it comes to right and wrong, that's why criminals exist."

Some people aren't inherenty good, it's sad, but it's a fact of life.

 

You can't follow only the good and state that the "bad" isn't relevant...if you're going to follow your Faith, you should do so fully, otherwise, you're basically making your own religion anyway.

 

I think I've already stated that I disagree with that. I also said that I won't judge those who choose to pick out what they like. They've got their sins, I've got mine. Nobody is perfect, whether they follow the law alone or a religion too.

 

I can't reply to the quotes from the bible as I've already said I'm not christian. My religion considers enslaving people a sin, in fact, one of the ways to atone for your sins is to set a slave free.

 

There is gender inequality in religion, true, but there's gender inequality in the world in general, regardless of whether or not the setting is a religion environment.

 

Personally, I'm content with the degree of gender equality in religion, the scale tips in favor of both genders in different issues, and I think that in the end it balances itself out.

 

people with reigious backgrounds DO commit crimes, and religion hasn't halted this. Many criminals have religions and have still done wrong.

I never said that it did hon :) I said it did "(when the rules are followed correctly, which they usually aren't)" Most, if not all crimes are sins, sinners obviously aren't following the rules of their religion correctly.

 

Since the discussion is "Is religion a good or bad thing for humanity" I can still say that in general I think it's a good thing.

[lilshadowdweller]

I think I've already stated that I disagree with that. I also said that I won't judge those who choose to pick out what they like. They've got their sins, I've got mine. Nobody is perfect, whether they follow the law alone or a religion too.

 

If we're all permitted to pick and choose, than how does religion keep morality? You're merely "picking" the morals you want, essentially, you are the decider. How is a God relevant in that case since you just assume what a God(s) would like?

 

I can't reply to the quotes from the bible as I've already said I'm not christian. My religion considers enslaving people a sin, in fact, one of the ways to atone for your sins is to set a slave free.

 

I was raised Catholic, so we followed the Bible.

 

There is gender inequality in religion, true, but there's gender inequality in the world in general, regardless of whether or not the setting is a religion environment.

 

So that makes it OK?

 

 

I never said that it did hon

 

You know, random thought, but normally when someone says "hon", they're doing it to be condescending. Not a big deal, but just letting you know that's what it conveys...

 

But I don't recall you ever stating that it was "if" they followed the rules. In fact, I had quoted your exact statement....

 

Not everyone has the same basic instincts when it comes to right and wrong, that's why criminals exist.

 

I disagree. Everyone does have the basic instincts! We all have compassion, empathy, ect. We're a social species and we need order. But we don't need a supernatural force to govern said order.

 

And like I said, I think religion, in this day and age, is bad. People are inherently good, not bad.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Zooba]

@lilshadowdweller

 

I was trying to keep it friendly, not trying to be condescending, sorry if it seemed so.

 

I quoted myself in my reply, "when the rules are followed correctly, which they usually aren't" That's also from the post you're referring to.

 

I don't like gender inequality, but I think it's inevitable, and I prefer the kind with rules I find fair, rather than leaving everyone to decide for themselves how they should or should not treat people of the opposite sex. Or people of the same sex, I prefer having a set code of conduct, one each individual holds themselves responsible for mentally, not just physically.

 

I think we're having two different discussions here. I'm talking about religion, the theory behind it, the idea, not religious people or how well people adhere to religion.

 

I think the main point that I am making is that religion, in and of itself, is good. How a person practises their religion is entirely dependant on the person, not the morals preached by their religion.

 

I also think you misunderstand my stance on the matter, I don't think that religion magically makes people perfect, nor that the absence of religion automatically makes people bad. I think that humanity is mixed, nobody is perfectly good or perfectly evil, and the presence of rules that you believe in and follow can curb the bad in humanity.

 

In reply to passiflora:

I don't think punishment in any form (mortal or by God) is a very good motivator at all.

Please keep in mind that I'm referring to people with "bad instincts." Obviously, if you are a good person, you wouldn't want to murder someone. If a person who would want to murder someone thought of the eternal, inevitable punishment awaiting them in the afterlife, I think it would be more effective at preventing the murder, as opposed to a non-believer who's only fear would be of the justice system, which isn't perfect, isn't inevitable.

 

If you're a good person, the presence or absence of divine retribution shouldn't be a problem, because you wouldn't want to commit sins naturally. For those who would want to commit sins, it helps to have a strong motivator.

 

I agree that those who do good for good's sake, as opposed to in fear of punishment, are ideal, better. But we don't live in an ideal world, and if fear of punishment prevents sins, rather than having those sins committed in fear's absence, I think it works.

[passiflora]

I think we're having two different discussions here. I'm talking about religion, the theory behind it, the idea, not religious people or how well people adhere to religion.

I know that this isn't in response to me, but I would like to point out that a religion is only as good as its adherents. Theory is nice, but without followers the religion wouldn't even exist - they represent their faith, even if they do it "wrong."

 

Please keep in mind that I'm referring to people with "bad instincts." Obviously, if you are a good person, you wouldn't want to murder someone. If a person who would want to murder someone thought of the eternal, inevitable punishment awaiting them in the afterlife, I think it would be more effective at preventing the murder, as opposed to a non-believer who's only fear would be of the justice system, which isn't perfect, isn't inevitable.

 

If you're a good person, the presence or absence of divine retribution shouldn't be a problem, because you wouldn't want to commit sins naturally. For those who would want to commit sins, it helps to have a strong motivator.

If someone's instincts were that poor, they'd probably meet the criteria for psychopathy, antisocial personality disorder, or similar illnesses - most other people are able to feel empathy and remorse (presumably two useful emotions when it comes to morality, a.k.a. "good instincts"). Either way, I'm not sure if supernatural punishment is still a great deterrent, because the former group probably wouldn't care, and the latter might just end up asking God for forgiveness and then everything's well and good again. Even "good people" sin, many religions teach that it's pretty much inevitable.

 

I'd really be curious to know how many people literally refrain from killing others (or committing other serious unlawful sins) only because of fear of punishment. Regardless, I know Christians tend to emphasize acting out of love over acting out of fear (I'm not sure about other religions, though). How many people follow that teaching? Not sure.

 

I agree that those who do good for good's sake, as opposed to in fear of punishment, are ideal, better. But we don't live in an ideal world, and if fear of punishment prevents sins, rather than having those sins committed in fear's absence, I think it works.

If it prevents crime, I can't really complain. I think I'm just reluctant to agree because - and this is a bit of a slippery slope - if we start to value fear of punishment as a motivator, isn't that good argument for reinstating the death penalty, or making other 'worldly' punishments more severe/radical or even inhumane?

 

I know that's not what you're advocating, but I'd just rather see us emphasize doing good because it's morally right (which we can determine without spiritual guidance), and getting sociopaths the help they need, rather than relying on fear.

[Zooba]

I know that this isn't in response to me, but I would like to point out that a religion is only as good as its adherents. Theory is nice, but without followers the religion wouldn't even exist - they represent their faith, even if they do it "wrong."

 

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on that point. I don't think you can hold the religion itself responsible for the piety (can't think of a more accurate word...religiousness?) , or lack thereof, of its followers. They may represent the faith in day to day situations, in small ways, but not in general. Lots of christians have sex before marriage, does that mean that christianity condones it? Are they really representing their religion? or themselves as individuals? I choose to view religion as the idea, not the people because if I viewed it as the people, it wouldn't have a definition at all. Everyone has different levels of spirituality and faith and have different degrees of adhering to the laws set by that faith. There are more religious people and less religious people, they aren't all clones.

 

I should also mention that I don't think fear is the mechanism of how religion works. I think that religion gives people hope and faith in a higher power that they can pray to. I can't say how often I'm soothed when I pray or think that God is protecting me. The fear aspect does exist though, and I'm trying to acknowledge it. I don't think that it's the major feeling that is evoked by having faith though.

 

Also, the reason I think fear is effective in religion is the divine, inevitable aspect of it, and the fact that the person believes in it in their hearts. I highly doubt that "worldly" fear would work in the same way, you can trick people, but you can't trick God.

[~Xandria]

I disagree. Everyone does have the basic instincts! We all have compassion, empathy, ect.

I've been reading these comments frequently and while I do agree with almost every point you've brought up; I have to disagree here. I do think that some criminals lack empathy. There has been many studies on the subject so saying everyone has "compassion and empathy" is not really true. I'm sure some criminals do and may just be so messed up in the head from mental illness that they can't control themsevles, I don't know... I'm not an expert. Just my take.

 

Anyways, I personally disagree with religion on almost every level. Sure I guess we could say that religion has taught as some basic morals but I can't help but feel like you just dismiss all the bad it has taught us too. I've read the bible which coincidentally turned me to the lack of religion I have today. I don't see how anyone who has actually read the bible can believe in something so evil.

 

I also don't feel that it's right to say "I do not believe in gay marriage and abortion because there are bible versus's that tell me it's evil".

 

What about the bible versus's that tell you it's okay to shun the disabled?

 

Deuteronomy 23:1 (KJV)

He that is wounded in the stones, or hath his privy member cut off, shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD.

 

Or the ones that say slavery is okay?

 

1 Peter 2:18 (NLT)

"You who are slaves must accept the authority of your masters. Do whatever they tell you — not only if they are kind and reasonable, but even if they are harsh."

 

Or this one saying it's okay to kill your children?

 

Deuteronomy 22:20-21

If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the girl's virginity can be found, she shall be brought to the door of her father's house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death. She has done a disgraceful thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in her father's house. You must purge the evil from among you.

 

Or this one on women in the church? Did you obey this while you are in church?

 

1 Corinthians 14:34-35

"Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church."

 

Just some examples. I hope I'm not being overly rude or offensive. I want to understand religious peoples point of view but it's hard for me to.

[Welcome Back Apathy]

I think the main point that I am making is that religion, in and of itself, is good. How a person practises their religion is entirely dependant on the person, not the morals preached by their religion.

 

If I am understanding your argument correctly, the reason why religion (to you) is good is because it sets up rules for ethics, and it's beneficial to have a set of rules to follow. It will improve ethics. Sure, there are bad eggs, but that's not religion's fault.

 

And I have to disagree very strongly on the point.

 

Following a set of rules is not the way to do it. Understanding the reasons WHY you choose a moral behavior is what is important. Philosophy will guide you through your moral behaviors. Reason and logic, more than anything, will guide you to the light and help you to make a decision. Heck, even my ECONOMICS degree helps me make moral decisions.

 

The sheer definition of religion denies you this option. Religion requires you to rely on faith. Faith, that thing that tells you to ignore facts. That thing that tells you what you are doing is right--even if logic and reason are stuck in the front door, trying to claw the other out of the way as they fight their way inside. That thing that tells you not to think.

 

Yes, you can pick and choose which parts of religion you choose to follow. Of course you can. But to do this defies religion. You are now breaking the rules that were supposedly so helpful. You are denying your faith, and instead employing logic. You are doing that thing that exists without religion. Therefore, religion only causes problems in this respect (blindly following rules instead of thinking about them) and questioning religion is what solves the problem.

 

This, then, is my response to "How a person practices religion depends on the person, not on the morals of the religion":

How a person practices religion definitely depends on the person. If the person happens to already naturally have good moral intuition, then they will be good. The problem is...if the person happens NOT to have good moral intuition, not only will that person be bad, but it will never occur to them to question the bad decisions or interpretations. That is entirely the fault of religion itself. And in fact, that person will then teach others the same bad rules, and the unwavering faith in bad ideas will persist.

[passiflora]

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on that point. I don't think you can hold the religion itself responsible for the piety (can't think of a more accurate word...religiousness?) , or lack thereof, of its followers. They may represent the faith in day to day situations, in small ways, but not in general. Lots of christians have sex before marriage, does that mean that christianity condones it? Are they really representing their religion? or themselves as individuals? I choose to view religion as the idea, not the people because if I viewed it as the people, it wouldn't have a definition at all. Everyone has different levels of spirituality and faith and have different degrees of adhering to the laws set by that faith. There are more religious people and less religious people, they aren't all clones.

I can agree with you that some of the ideas in some religions are good, but if the debate is on whether religion has done more bad than good, I think it really comes down to it's followers. If interpretation results in conflict and things can so easily be taken out of context, is it really that good? It's one thing to blatantly disregard what a religion teaches, but it's another altogether when the message is unclear in the first place. Even the most pious people have trouble agreeing on many things.

 

In your example of sex before marriage, I think you could interpret it in a number of ways:

1. The bible doesn't actually condemn it (it's a long shot, but I've heard people try and argue it)
   
2. The fear of God isn't compelling enough to moderate a person's actions (voiding our previous argument)
   
3. They lack faith (fair enough - but it doesn't mean that it's wrong)
   
4. Despite strong faith, people see nothing logically wrong with having [safe] intimate relationships outside of marriage, because they don't see it as inherently harmful (the bible isn't necessarily a good moral guide)
   

 

 

 

Also, the reason I think fear is effective in religion is the divine, inevitable aspect of it, and the fact that the person believes in it in their hearts. I highly doubt that "worldly" fear would work in the same way, you can trick people, but you can't trick God.

Good point, though I still think it'd be interesting to see how much devine retribution actually influences people in their day-to-day lives (i.e. if it actually has a measurable effect, or if other forces are at work)!

[Zooba]

if the person happens NOT to have good moral intuition, not only will that person be bad, but it will never occur to them to question the bad decisions or interpretations.

Why do you think they wouldn't question their interpretations? Supposedly, even the people with the worst moral intuition realize that they aren't God. I think in the situation you've given, a person with bad moral intuition would justify their actions through religion, they won't follow their own instincts blindly unless they think that what they are doing is what God wants. A lot of things in religion are straight forward and don't require interpretation, most of the major sins are quite bluntly called sins. People who choose to re-interpret things like that are coating a bitter pill in sugar. They don't want to acknowledge to themselves that what they want to do is a a sin and instead choose to make out like it isn't to try and fool themselves. Also, most religions have the equivalent of a priest that people are encouraged to seek guidance from when they feel confused.

 

 

I still think it'd be interesting to see how much devine retribution actually influences people in their day-to-day lives (i.e. if it actually has a measurable effect, or if other forces are at work)!

 

Definitely agree, after all, what I'm pointing out is what I think is happening, no idea how much of that is true in real life. I can only speak from my personal experience and what I see around me, and so far, I think it does influence people.

[~Xandria]

I think the point that is trying to be made is that there are a lot of sins that people do not agree with and that some religious people use this to justify killing in the name of God. Terroists are killing in the name of God, abortion clinics are being bombed in the name of God, homosexuals are being killed in the name of God, children are being murdered in the name of God. You get the idea. The orginal question was whether or not religion does more harm than good. Sure some individuals use there religion for good but I'd say overall it does more harm.

[lilshadowdweller]

I keep hearing the same argument regarding how Followers interpret their Faith. Since the original question is if religion happens to be "bad" or "good", I'd rather use a chart detailing the bad now.

 

I think I'd rather list my reasoning of WHY religion is ludicrous and why it does more harm than good:

• MidEvil Times: People were mistaken to have made pacts with the devil, many women were burnt to death on the cross or "tested" in a manner where there was no possible way they could survive. (Ie; Pushing women suspected of being Witches off of a cliff, if they were Witches, they should have been able to fly away, if not, they would die. But they would die good people.
  
• Roman Catholics/Christians: Are opposed in modern society of to teaching teenagers "save sex", or using condoms or any form of protection because of this "abstinence only" education (which DOES NOT WORK) diseases spread, young people get pregnant, lives are ruined. Christians in American actually attempt to teach Abstinence. They are indirectly creating harm to their children.
  
• Homophobia: Many Christian groups within the States and even Canada attempt to spread fear and hate of homosexuals, and MOST of the opposition is based on religious backgrounds. Their religion INFLUENCES our law(s), and keeps inequality prominent
  
• Discrimination Against Other Religions and People are aren't Religious: States in the USA have created laws detailing that Christianitys "Creationism" be taught ALONGSIDE the Big Bang Theory. How is this fair to people who aren't religious or are of a different religion?
  
• Preventing Science from Progression: Stem Cell research is one of the most promising form of science. It could potential ease a lot of pain and suffering. Yet, religious groups FIGHT to halt Stem Cell research! Galileo was put under arrest for trying to teach that the Earth revolved around the Sun. We all know he was right.
  
• Children Obedience Training: Religion is taught to children at an age before the brain has fully developed, it's in grained in their heads well before they can make a decision for themselves.
  
• Discrimination Against Canadian First Nations: When we immigrated to Canada, Christianity was forced upon the locals. Many of them were sexually abused and harmed if they spoke their Native language. We killed their culture on the guise of our "God".
  
• Harm Of Democracy: Religious people like their Faith and want everyone to embrace it. They want special "privileges" (like the ability to not marry homosexuals in their Churches, or to discriminate against woman), and they're VERY critical if people speak out against it. They support teaching children (all children) their Faith, they support having their Church Members in politics (like the Pope).
  
• Religion As a Source Of "Evil": We all know that throughout History, religious wars (many!) have been created. The Jewish State of Israel imposes policies on it's Arab inhabitants. Bad feelings between Hindues and Muslims have cost us countless innocent lives. Hitler himself was a self-based "Christian" performing under "God". He wasn't a Christian in the normal idea, but he believed his was doing God's will.
  

 

 

It doesn't matter if you think religion is just thought of differently by people. All of these things have degraded society and continue to do so! The discrimination, the belief in the Supernatural despite all evidence pointing to no Supernatural aspects at all. Ect.

[Zooba]

-Medieval times are known as the dark ages, most christians were illiterate, and the church was corrupt and rich. Nobody knew how to question people who were richer and smarter than they were. Once people started getting educated, more and more went against the corrupt church.

 

-Maybe it isn't the teaching of abstinence (as opposed to safe sex) that's the problem, maybe it's the way it's taught. Where I'm from, we are expected to abstain from sex before we marry and we do. They don't have to do much convincing to be honest...no offense but there is a lot of media coverage of teen pregnancies in western countries and if the girls don't give up the baby for adoption, they've basically ruined their future. Also, safe sex isn't 100% safe.

 

-You forget that creationism was and still is a valid theory, as is evolution. The highest degree of scientific recognition is to call something a theory, and before evolution came along, creationism was the most popular. Just because evolution is the most popular today doesn't mean that creationism is 100% wrong. In the end, despite scientific progression, nobody has figured out where the "energy" that makes us all tick comes from or where it goes when we die. To this day, we don't know what causes our hearts to beat, we've broken down the sequence of events and, to some degree, the mechanism, but "step 1" is simultaneous (AKA nobody knows how/why it starts/stops beating).

 

-

Religious people like their Faith and want everyone to embrace it.

I actually find this a bit insulting, I'm religious, I like my faith, I don't give two hoots if you decide to convert or not. Religion is a personal relationship between a person and God. I have absolutely nothing to do with your relationship, or lack thereof, with God. If your government is enforcing laws you don't find fair, or you find discriminatory, take it up with them, not the entire global religious community.

 

-If I remember correctly, the original language of the bible was latin? If speaking your native language was against christianity, the entire western world would be talking latin now, and not english. It was translated to english centuries after christianity was established. The immigrants to the "new world" weren't forcing their language and culture on the native because of God, but that's how they chose to justify it.

 

-Children are taught religion early to teach them morality (I realize that you don't think religion teaches correct morality, but I do believe so). I don't think that that is a bad thing, and I don't think it's "ingrained" in their minds. Look at your case, you said you were raised catholic, you chose to shed religion later in life. As for their childhood, how is this belief any different from raising your children vegans or vegetarians? You raise them however you want to, once they become adults, it's up to them. That is your right as a parent. If religion was truly ingrained in children's minds, nobody would ever become an atheist.

 

-As a source of Evil...

I don't think religion is the source of the evil that happens in its name. The source is humanity, justifying their actions. Religion calls murder a sin, murder in religion's name doesn't make it not a sin.

 

In the end I think it all winds down to a few fundamental issues:

-Whether you believe in the existence of a greater power.

-Whether you think religion is man-made or created by God.

-Whether, even if you do believe in a greater power, you think that modern religion is corrupt.

 

We seem to disagree on the most important of those issues, the first one. That's the impression I've gotten at least.

Another thing I've noticed is that after condemning catholicism and deciding you didn't like it, you chose to condemn all of religion with it as well.

 

Anyways, I'm off now, it's been interesting talking with you all :)