Sunday Symposium: Religion

[Dog Pants]

We were all quite agreeable on last week's topic, so this week I'm going for something I think will be a bit more divisive. Religion, good or bad? I don't think we need to go into what people believe, because nobody will change anyone else's opinions on that, and nor should they try. I'm more interested in whether we think the world would be a better place if mankind never chose to put their faith in a higher power.

It's pretty hard to keep personal opinion out of even the most basic statement about religion. That last sentence up there could quite easily have ended with 'faith in God,' and the fact that it doesn't indicates that I'm not a religious person. A lot of good and bad has been done in the name of faith. At the most basic principles almost every religion in the world dictates that people try to be good and honest. At ground level it seems to me that most religious people try to be good and honest, at least in their own mind. There are, of course, people who manipulate that in order to make faith a weapon. There always has been, from the crusades to the Westboro Baptists, to the Islamic fundamentalists taking over parts of the Middle East today. Has it been worth it? Personally I think so, overall, but I also think it's an outdated method of controlling the population. We have police horses, CCTV, the NSA, and other such modern methods of keeping people in line today, and while millions of people today still draw strength and comfort from their faith, the damage done by dogmatic lunatics makes me wonder if it's worth it in this day and age. Anyway, enough about what I think, what about you people?

[Joose]

I think a lot of peoples issues with religion stems from the fact that the most visible members of almost every religion are the loony minority.

Many peoples image of Islam is terrorists, oppression of women and prejudice, but thats really not a fair representation of Muslim people at all. Islam actually expressly forbids killing other people (even non Muslims) and goes as far as to say that Muslims should go out of their way to protect Christians. The whole oppression of women thing is misattributed: its a cultural problem, not a religious one.

Similarly, many peoples view of Christians are the nutters who stand on a box in the middle of town shouting about Jesus, the Westboro guys, creationists and other anti-science people. However, I grew up in a Christian household, was taken to church every week as a kid and as a result, I know loads of committed Christians. I'm probably not exaggerating if I say hundreds. I only know one crazy box shouter, I'm not aware that any of them are creationists or anti-science in any way. Other things that may surprise you: only the old buggers have an issue with homosexuals (those of an age that would probably be against gays regardless of religious beliefs), many of them don't believe the Bible is an absolute truth, almost none of them think anything is "the work of the devil". I know a number of Christians with science related jobs, from teachers to one theoretical astrophysicist.

The problem is that Christians look and act like regular people nearly all the time unless they are being loons or being horrible shits. So even if only one in a million of them are horrible loons, non christians only see that one, so the perception is that all of them are horrible loons.

I think a big source of the misconceptions atheists have about religious people are down to atheists not understanding that religious people argue about their religions as much as scientists debate science. I dont know any two Christians who would agree 100% about every aspect of Christianity. They don't agree about women vicars, they don't agree about big bang vs creationism, they dont agree about homosexuality, they dont agree about how to take communion, they don't agree about the right way to pray, they don't agree about the nature of god, they dont agree about the afterlife...In fact, beyond the absolute basics (god exists, Jesus was his son, etc) I doubt there is much that all christians agree with. I know Islam is much the same. I would be amazed to discover that this isn't common to nearly all religions.

People often point to religion as being the cause of many bad things that have happened throughout history. I think thats bullshit. Sure, there are some cases where a bad thing happened due to religion, but I think there are as many (possibly more) bad things that happened for purely secular reasons. I also think that a lot of the bad things that happened in the name of religion would have happened anyway, even if you could magically remove religions influence on historic events. Religion is just the excuse. "We really want their stuff. Lets kill them all, take their stuff and say god told us to do it".

So, overall, do I think the world would be a better place without religion? No. I think it would be no better and no worse. I think bad things would still be done, I think good things would also still be done. Just in the name of something else. I think the world would be a much better place if everyone stopped being so aggressive about other peoples beliefs. (And please dont try to claim that you have no beliefs. If you think there is a god, thats a belief, but so is thinking that there is no god. I may give you a pass if you are unsure whether a god exists or not.)

The last point I want to make: Atheists often say "God" and "Religion" and then just talk about the Abrahamic idea of God and seem to forget that there are other kinds of religions out there. Some of them are waaaaay different. For example, Hindus think there are a bunch of different gods, Buddhists don't believe in any gods at all and Shinto thinks that everything is a god (kinda). Dont make the mistake that all religions are basically the same with different shaped churches. They very much are not.

[Mr. Johnson]

A good question. I'm really bad at forming a coherent opinion but religion is something I have some experience with so I'll give it a go.

One of the most important influences in my life was my grandmother on my mother's side, who was and still is a lovely person that always showed kindness to others and is the kind of grandma that always has an old saying or story for every situation. She was also a religious person, but knew how to read between the lines of what the bible dictates and instead of taking it literally she simply adopted the core message of the Catholic faith which is that you should always be kind to others and that what the church preaches is more like a guideline than a set of rules. You can see this had an effect on my mom too as she's a very rational, liberal thinking person, as is her brother (to a degree).

On the other hand, my grandmother on my father's side of the family was a Godfearing person that took everything the bible said literally and was a devoted and dedicated church-goer, she had a whole bunch of crosses adorning her house, and one of these* above the kitchen door, which is the Belgian trademark for unpleasant grandmothers everywhere. She was and still is a horrible, domineering wretch of a person who sees all the bad things that happen to her as a punishment from God, even though everything is clearly her fault. This you can see reflected in my dad, who is very hesitant of change and still has difficulties making choices because his mother always made them for him. (Guided by what the church told her)

So I've always had two perfect examples of what religion can mean to someone, and even though I have always resented my paternal grandmother for the things she did to my dad I'm glad I have a firsthand experience with that side of the religious spectrum as you need to see both sides of something before you can form an opinion of your own.

The problem with religion is, in my opinion, that you can't really apply it as broadly as the religious instances would like. I used the example of my grandmothers since it shows that how you apply it in your daily life depends on your character, because even though without religion my grandmothers would've been respectively a kind or an unkind person, they've both used it to strengthen their qualities. The anti-religious Atheists adopt the stance that if we abolish religion everything will work out better, but I find this a very naïve opinion because we'll just start fighting each other over what colour pants you should wear.

In short, as long as you don't let it control you entirely I have absolutely no problem with religion. Besides, there's so many cool Gods to choose from!


*It means "God sees me, no cursing here", which is funny because my grandma swears all the time.

[Mr. Johnson]

You might not like to hear this Pants, but I agree with everything that Joose said in his post.

[buzzmong]

I have a multifaceted view on religion, notably I very much draw a distinction between the concepts of personal religion and organised religion. Below is a sort of summary.

Organised religion as a whole in my view has been detrimental to the human race and has not offered that many benefits. It's been used as way of controlling others by a small group of the educated elite, generally by taking advantage of the fact that for many years the human population as a whole was mostly uneducated. Often a lot of religious doctrine has become law, resulting in the persecution of people who don't follow it or who don't fit into its mold. See things like Jews only being allowed to marry Jews, or Islam proclaiming children belong to their fathers reglion despite their own choice (topical, as it was in the news recently) etc...
I'm not saying it's entirely born of malice, quite a lot of stuff is probably started off with good intentions, but in the modern age where everyone has much more information available and can make much more informed decisions about how to live their live, I don't see the need of it.
What's also of interest is that a lot of organised religions operate more like a business, trying to discourage you from trying out competitors products while also trying to get you to buy into the idea that theirs is the "correct" one and absolute, because like businesses, they live or die based upon if they have customers or not.

For me, organised reglion has reached its sell by date and really should be consigned to the history books where it belongs. A lot of the religious organisations that actually do good things could and would easily operate without their chosen religion being part of it in my view, which pushes me even more towards the notion that organised religion just isn't needed.

Personal religion on the other hand, while not something I personally subscribe to, I can see why people would take it onboard. I can see why people might choose to believe in something, or seek solace in a supposed deity, or take it on as a guideline of which to live their live by, but the crux for me is that personal religion offers freedom to choose and shape your own beliefs, and hopefully not just toe the line of your peer group (or the organised religion around it). The other key part why I'm okay with personal religion is the lack of need to convert others to your way of thinking or to press it upon other people, and you shouldn't need too, because it should be such a deeply personal thing that it only matters to you. If you choose to believe in a deity or not, and if you do, what you actually choose to believe, is simply your own choice and no-one elses.


So, I'd like to see organised religion abolished, but still maintain freedom upon a person's personal choice of religion. That said, I still think the reglion of Bill and Ted is the best way to go about your lives for the vast majority of people on this planet.

[Dog Pants]

You might not like to hear this Pants, but I agree with everything that Joose said in his post.

Yes, Joose is clearly a master debater.

We have police horses

Damn, caught out by my own word felcher.

[Joose]

[FatherJack]

Like Joose, I got taken to church as a kid. I went to Sunday School there and attended various organisations that were based there, some of them Christian-themed, some just for any young people.

As such I learned that there's way more to a church than the actual chapel and a lot more going on than prayers, hymns and sermons on a Sunday. I kicked footballs, had discussions about the deeper meanings of bible passages, drank coffee, learned knots, built a wall, performed plays, snogged girls, learned public speaking, drove gokarts and went camping in that church. As a Baptist church it had a more relaxed atmosphere than some, but I'd imagine there are similar things going on in the building surrounding places of worship of all religions. They also have a food bank there, give homeless people shelter at Christmas and various other good deeds.

It's not just a glorified community centre though. Pretty much everyone that runs the activities, staffs the offices and the cafe does so for free. I know some charities are run along the same lines, without any particular religious affiliation, so I'm not saying these things couldn't exist in the vacuum of a world with no religion, just that the fact that churches do plenty of good is a case for the continued existence of organised religion.

That's the truth of the normal, non-radical side of religion - it's the fete and the jumble sale, not the overbearing drive to indoctrinate everyone. If someone attending an activity wants to know more about the spiritual aspects then they are pleased for them, if they don't then that's fine too.

To say religion is outdated because we are now clever enough not to need it is grossly insulting to people with faith. Someone's belief in something is an intensely personal thing and nothing to do with how intelligent they are. They aren't doing good deeds under threat of eternal damnation, they are doing them because they genuinely want to do good, and their faith gives then guidance over how best to do that.

Most of the problems attributed to religion are cultural ones. Laws might be founded on some tenets, but it is society's tolerance (or lack thereof) which perpetuate these rulings. Many extremist views are based on interpretations rather than direct quotes from sacred books. Chiefly though, most people who think religions are about hate and condemnation really haven't done a whole lot of research into them.

Oh, and Bill and Ted were basically paraphrasing Jesus.

[Dr. kitteny berk]

You want religion, you have have religion, fine by me. You want me to have religion, go to your place of worship and pray for my soul to be redeemed.

But keep me the fuck out of it, I don't want to know, if you come peddling your imaginary friend to me, you're going to have a very, very bad time.

[Joose]

To say religion is outdated because we are now clever enough not to need it is grossly insulting to people with faith. Someone's belief in something is an intensely personal thing and nothing to do with how intelligent they are. They aren't doing good deeds under threat of eternal damnation, they are doing them because they genuinely want to do good, and their faith gives then guidance over how best to do that.

Very this

Saying religion is something we may or may not need any more implies that it is definitely not true, to any extent, and that there is no god or whatever and that the only possible purpose of religion is to impose a moral framework on people. Thats very much missing the point of belief. Yes, some religious people are religious simply because they were brought up that way and have never really thought about it properly, but other religious people are very intelligent, scientifically minded people who have thought about it and still believe in something religious. Are these people likely to thing the world was created in a week and everything started a few thousand years ago? Probably not. But like I said before, its completely possible to be religious and not have that be incompatible with a rational, scientific view of the world.

[Dog Pants]

There's a difference between referring to religion as an institution and suggesting anyone who believes in God is an idiot. I refer to it as an institution because as far as I'm concerned it is. I could be equally insulted at the implication that I should humour people by pretending to believe something I don't. I'm not, because I have no issue with other peoples' beliefs if they don't affect me, but I don't really see the distinction.

[Joose]

I could be equally insulted at the implication that I should humour people by pretending to believe something I don't.

I don't think anyone is suggesting that. However, suggesting that you don't need religion as an institution implies that, for example, Christianity as a belief is somehow separate from Christianity as an organisation, and I dont think thats true. I dont think you can have one without the other. Obviously you can't have the organisation without the belief, but if you have a number of people all believing roughly the same thing the organisation springs naturally out of that, and once an organisation gets large enough it inevitably becomes an institution.

What I meant was that saying we might not need it any more implies that the only benefit of religion is the practical benefit, whether thats the good deeds done in its name or the moral guidance it provides or whatever. And thats missing the point that the people who follow a religion believe in it (usually). And for some (I suspect many) the institution that goes along with it is an integral part of that belief. So suggesting that it might no longer be required is suggesting that they should alter their fundamental view of the nature of reality because its not particularly helpful any more.

In case I'm still not making my point particularly well, imagine this scenario: Someone puts together a solid argument that clearly shows Atheism has no practical benefit. Its not adding anything good to the world, and religion is. Doesnt matter which religion, and for the purposes of this example it doesn't actually matter what their argument is, its just some compelling reason that shows going to church and having a pray gives some practical benefit to the world. Would that change whether or not you believed in God?

[Dog Pants]

Okay, I see what you mean. I wasn't trying to imply people should stop believing, or that organised religion should be disbanded. Only that from my point of view it isn't necessary as a form of social control as once was.

I actually have a rather peculiar opinion on religious belief. I won't say it's a belief of mine, more a private theory, but I believe the respective focuses of various religions exist in that people believe in them and that affects their behaviour. Kind of a social phenomenon, or how a rainbow doesn't technically exist in any physical way, only in how it's perceived (well okay the photons exist and light wavelengths scatter, but give me a break here I'm struggling with metaphors). It's how I empathise with a concept that's alien to me.