It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Religious segregation is the separation of people according to their religion. The term has been applied to cases of religious-based segregation occurring as a social phenomenon, as well as to segregation arising from laws, whether explicit or implicit. The similar term religious apartheid has also been used for situations where people are separated based on religion, including sociological phenomena.
Now, let's look at another aspect of this declaration - altruism. Is relligion responsible for more altruistic behaviour? Is religion somehow responsible for pushing altruistic behaviour past just those of our kin? Without religion, would we only be concerned with the survival of our own(and those that we have a close kinship with) genetic codes? After all, an organism in nature, more or less, will tend to stick with those of its own kind. Many things that are introduced that are foreign and aren't food are usually seen as a threat until proven otherwise.
Is it RELIGION that is responsible for fear, hatred, intimidation, evolutionary hindrance, and segregation...or is it the APPLICATION and INTERPRETATIONS of RELIGION that cause these things? Is religion itself a CONSPIRACY by definition?
Originally posted by iamcamouflage
reply to post by Agree2Disagree
I think if there were no religion, people would still find ways to segregate but the reasons you listed, ethnicity, monetary status, political status, etc. would be more easily refuted because they wouldnt be based on faith. Logic and critical thought could show that most claims to segregate are false or not based in fact.
Ethnicity, monetary status and political status are not determined on belief and the differences can be tested and analyzed. Example: Insisting superiority or segregating based on ethnicity can be proven to be baseless. Segregation based on monetary status, can also be shown to be false, because most people know that being rich does not make you a good person. Yes some would try to use it as a divisive tool but no one could claim that they have faith in monetary segregation as means to a better world, without having to show evidence of it.
In my opinion, the reason that religion divides people is because each separate religion feels that their religion is the ONE and ONLY. And that evidence is based entirely on faith. So no actual proof for the claim is needed.
First off, I dont believe that true altruism exists. Secondly, i'm not sure what you are implying here. Animals of the same species will show behavior that helps their species. You ask, without religion would we only be responsible for survival of our own kind. All humans are of the same "kind". There is really no such thing as race. Religion puts a barrier where one should not exist.
I think that religion and the application of it are the same thing. Is poetry responsible for the emotion it evokes or is it the interpretation of the poetry.
The basis of religion is to have "faith" that what the books of these religions state is true. And the way most of the "religious" books are written, leave it open for interpretation. Humans are allowed to put faith in anything, so its not the source, it is the fallacy or fault of "faith".
Religion/bible, claim to be the word of god so it carries more weight than Catcher in the Rye or any other piece of writing but when you allow someone to use faith as a free pass to be right regardless of evidence you are in turn giving a free pass to interpret and apply what is in that piece of writing to your own ends.
There are things like racial superiority....Have you ever tried to convince a "skin-head" that he's not superior to african-americans? Good luck with that one. It's just as hard, if not harder, than convincing a religious zealot that God doesn't love him/her. So, there are in fact other things that could be used to segregate the masses based on belief.
Discriminating and differentiating are two different things. One is nature and one is nurture.