reply to post by The All Seeing I
but even without religion, affiliations will still rise. - a free society if you will? - as in nothing to tell you are right, you are wrong, you are
as right as you feel you are (I can already live this way). but Someone will establish something to follow. As much as I would like to believe that we
are at a point in time, where we can just say "hey from here on out its ancestral ethics" I just infer something is right or wrong based off how my
parents describe it to me. - I disagree - someone will create a manifesto to abide by.
(smart trained rational men & women of course)
I will use Christianity as an example of means to my next point:
Teaching to hate sin and not the sinner is to justify forgiveness - love thy neighbor - pretty simple.
I will use Naturalism as an example of a more specific atheistic standpoint:
Teaching to forgive one another, for all are a product of their environment.
The situation shapes the behavior, so hate the situation.
The primary difference - one will constantly change.
but I will say, both systems ask for a progressiveness from the heart.
Naturalist do not believe in divine justice - but they don't have to because they have not blamed anyone, only the situation. - So the teaching goes
how to always avoid the situation; or take away the situation all together, so that one cannot experience it.
If a gun can be used to kill someone, take them away.
If gambling leads to stress and bankruptcy, take it away.
If money leads to greed and competitiveness, take it away.
Even though there are many more (all hypothetical), even some I can certainly agree with, the problem I have is the constant restriction/change.
Now considering some people might not agree with this, it is in agreement with how some can explain the world. Even if to the point of exposing a
scientific no-free-will doctrine, that explains human behavior beyond self-responsibility. Someone in power will only preach to keep each-other in
line - how to fix human behavior? by constantly changing our environment, into a "utopia" way of life.
you can even say your opinions slowly will not ven matter anymore, you are just a puppet in mother nature's show, take appreciation in her, she is
every cause you can be thankful for. "thankful for?" - Now it's starting to to sound more like a religion into some organized way of understanding
to affiliate the myriad opinions so that we can achieve peace. - a peace of restricted happiness bound by any men in a leadership position -
(you can imagine why modern religion has lasted as long as it has)
I know what I wrote was a slippery-slope - it wasn't meant to be that realistic - we all just don't fit into a category so black and white.
I just know a lot of theism is in relation to "fate" as well as free-will.
just trying to open the discussion
If you want my honest opinion, I think religious doctrine has more cons than no doctrine at all - I also think it has more pros than no doctrine at