Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Mongrel]

Oh I don't know, that's not as rare as you think.

[Kashan]

I think a lot of what you're attributing to religion or politics is really just part of the cultural inclination of humans towards tribalism.

[Mothra]

I'd argue that this is true of the far sides of religion, but is equally true of the far sides of any other political structure.

Like organized religion, the more entrenched sides of any political system don't operate off of reason either. Both see the world through a lens that makes them selectively choose to believe that which supports their own beliefs and ignore that which doesn't. The problem with organized religion is the same with extreme members of anything: they don't see reality, they see a cartoon version of a reality that's nice and simple and clear.

In Uganda (and a lot of African nations) I see good being done for the wrong reasons. I'm not denying that organized religion has been one of the most altrusitic and charitable and all-together positive forces we have in the world today, but if we only had a "be nice to everyone" club instead of a these religious organizations that contort reality to offer a clear direction for helpful action, we could have the altruism without the manipulative bullshit we've got here.

What organized religion lets you do is act toward a clearcut good, by simply playing by the set rules. You act with the understanding that this is what you're supposed to be doing, and by doing what you're supposed to be doing, things will be better in the greater scheme of things (which is beyond your understanding). Any system that determines "what you're supposed to be doing" by any means but reason - something we can use to actually work out what is the right thing to do in any given circumstance - is irresponsible at the least, and dangerous at the worst.

[Classic]

But at the same time, people pick and choose what they want to take as their rules from their chosen religion. It doesn't seem to have very much to do with the actual tenets of the religion, so much as people cobbling together passages and interpretations to justify what they want to do anyhow.

[Mothra]

Yeah, which is A-OK, but an organized church or faith of some kind needs a set of rules at the core. The groups the faithful are supporting are supposed to believe all of it, even if their followers don't. And it's not like you can debate or vote for anything in such an organization, either, because you can't officially change a religion.

[Classic]

Someone is forgetting the councils of nicea. Yes, you really can put this shit to vote, and you really can change the central dogma of a religion. Though rarer after the initial dogma gets solidly codified, significant changes to the theology and dogma still do take place. Indeed, it even occurs amongst fundamentalists, who claim their ethos from the inalterable quality of their religious texts.

I'm also not sure what you mean here:

The groups the faithful are supporting are supposed to believe all of it, even if their followers don't.

Do you mean to say that religious organizations cannot support groups unless those groups' ideologies are aligned with the religion's principles? Could you clarify that?

EDIT:

Though, I should add, the most dramatic changes in "catholic" dogma occur/are caused by the formation of a new denomination. It is true that the catholic church is largely a conservative force. A roast beef once mentioned that the main body of the catholic church is routinely 40-60 years socially behind.

[Kashan]

you can't officially change a religion.

Except that rules change all the time to fit the politics of the culture. Nobody in America gave two shits about abortion until the evangelicals needed an issue to wrap themselves around that wasn't anti-integration. Religious morality changes massively within religions from place to place, sect to sect, and overtime.

[sei]

you're pretty much counting on the people around you being simply too lazy to persecute you

Works for most of the internet, given PC piracy.

Then, there's also speeding, and...

[Mongrel]

Well, that's more a case where you take advantage of the fact that even 10% apprehension/prosecution rates are highly unlikely, let alone 100%.

Total enforcement is difficult, this does not mean that the enforcers are lazy.

_{And that's where peer social pressure comes in!}

[Misha]

you can't officially change a religion.

Except that rules change all the time to fit the politics of the culture. Nobody in America gave two shits about abortion until the evangelicals needed an issue to wrap themselves around that wasn't anti-integration. Religious morality changes massively within religions from place to place, sect to sect, and overtime.

People DID care about abortion in the past, it just didn't become a major issue until it became easily available (without killing the woman). Saying the religious selfishly changed their minds about it is kinda like saying ethical debates about cloning are contrived because nobody had them in the 1800s.

[TA]

Well, that's more a case where you take advantage of the fact that even 10% apprehension/prosecution rates are highly unlikely, let alone 100%.

Total enforcement is difficult, this does not mean that the enforcers are lazy.

_{And that's where peer social pressure comes in!}

I figure this is where the 3 year penalty for failure to turn in a known homosexual might come into play.

[Mongrel]

Yer lookin' kinda fruity there, mister. 

[Büge]

I think a lot of what you're attributing to religion or politics is really just part of the cultural inclination of humans towards tribalism.

I prefer tribadism, myself.

[Transportation]

It doesn't seem to have very much to do with the actual tenets of the religion, so much as people cobbling together passages and interpretations to justify what they want to do anyhow.

This argument is silly in regards to homosexuality, since it was fairly normal in pre-Christian Rome, tolerated in pre-1800s East Asia as long as you had kids (as far as I recall), and Uganda had an explicitly gay king* before colonization.

In short, homophobia in Uganda is the direct result of Christianity's interference in the region (also Islam's). I somehow doubt people would consider "kill gays" a good idea unless it was tied up with salvation, God, etc as part of the package.

I suppose you could say that not all Christians do that and to say it's Christianity's fault is a hasty generalization, but at the end of the day they still have a holy book that says to stone homosexuals. There is a certain amount of responsibility here.

*He was also a douchebag, but that's neither here nor there.

[Mongrel]

I think a lot of what you're attributing to religion or politics is really just part of the cultural inclination of humans towards tribalism.

I prefer tribadism, myself.

 

[Rico]

but at the end of the day they still have a holy book that says to stone Pagan priests using homosexual orgy as a fertility ritual but lol editors with agendas

Which, really, supports both Classic and your points equally.

And makes me giggle even harder at that guy making his own translation to remove those dirty liberal influences from his Bible.

[Mothra]

Wait, really? So the fact that these Pagan priests were homosexual wasn't really the focus so much as "general perversion"?

[Kashan]

Wait, really? So the fact that these Pagan priests were homosexual wasn't really the focus so much as "general perversion"?

Well, the primary place that evangelicals reference as a condemnation for homosexuality is in Leviticus, which is a super crazy book and honestly we don't know what the hell it says there. Common interpretations are that it was a prescription against raping your prisoners of war as was common at the time or what transportation said.

Really, the big reason Christianity is so crazy in America compared to everywhere else is that printing costs finally came down enough that people could own their own bibles, reading became a wide spread skill even among the only marginally educated, and people were separated from the power of the traditional catholic churches authority. So a bunch of people who have no context for what they're reading pick up the bible and start interpreting things however they like, and teaching their interpretations to anyone who will listen.


On the subject of changing the rules of evangelical Christianity in relation to abortion. http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070528/blumenthal

[The Artist Formerly Known As Yoji]

From what I've heard, a lot of those rules about sexin' (the story of Onan, going forth and multiplying, Leviticus 18, etc.) were made when the Jews were a tinier race than ever and were trying to build a nation. So to have a nation, you need a big population and army, which required lots and lots of babies. That would make any waste of semen (which men just have SO LITTLE OF DON'T WASTE IT) a crime against the state, I guess.

I'm probably mixing something up, but it sounds more realistic to me than "AN INVISIBLE SKY GIANT TOLD ME TO DO THIS OR WE'LL ALL BE SODOMIZED WITH HOT POKERS AND LIKE IT FOREVER"

[Kashan]

From what I've heard, a lot of those rules about sexin' (the story of Onan, going forth and multiplying, Leviticus 18, etc.) were made when the Jews were a tinier race than ever and were trying to build a nation. So to have a nation, you need a big population and army, which required lots and lots of babies. That would make any waste of semen (which men just have SO LITTLE OF DON'T WASTE IT) a crime against the state, I guess.

I'm probably mixing something up, but it sounds more realistic to me than "AN INVISIBLE SKY GIANT TOLD ME TO DO THIS OR WE'LL ALL BE SODOMIZED WITH HOT POKERS AND LIKE IT FOREVER"

It was a common belief in some middle eastern cultures that it takes 100 drops of blood to make a drop of marrow, and 100 drops of marrow to make a drop of semen.