posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 04:36 AM
I am not of the opinion that religion has ever caused killing, torture, and the like, but rather belief (as well as non-belief) has been used and
still is used as a tool to promote collectivist conformity and destroy individualism. Anyone who blames such atrocities solely on religion (while
bashing those who do not conform to their non-belief) is clearly either incapable of seeing the larger picture or part of the movement to destroy the
individualist drive within humanity.
When one understands the tools a society has at its disposal to cause members of that society to conform (governance, morality/religion,
education/science, the arts, and economics, etc.) I am fully confident that they can see past blaming the tools and see that it is something much
deeper which is at work - "man-herding".
If I wanted people to conform to my "way" I would use all of the tools at my disposal including turning a peaceful movement of individualism (such a
Christianity) into a farce and later claiming it always had "socialist" leanings. For example, it is often claimed that Christianity was meant to
be collectivist because it required people to turn over their property and share it with everyone, which is patently false. Christianity REQUIRED
nothing (like socialism does), but rather ASKED the individual to volunteer via their own love and kindness to share with others. It didn't run ads,
it didn't get government backing - it went to the human heart, on an individual level, and said "If you believe in this philosophical mindset, then
put your money where your mouth is and voluntarily prove it IN YOUR WAY."
Christianity's founder, Jesus Christ, laid down the philosophy and made only ONE requirement: If you believe in Him (in other words, His way), then
the rest will naturally follow in its own good time - seek and you will find. There is nothing FORCED and state mandated or even economic about that.
How can a TOOL be a philosophy?
And how can one claim those who kill and torture under the disguise of such a name are true believers in such and so the original philosophy should be
condemned? They could only do so if they know nothing of the philosophy and certainly do not volunteer to love their fellow man, but rather have
their own or rather collective interests at heart. To be capable of understanding that the collective is made up of individuals (which means if it is
true individualism it must be voluntary and not forced) is precisely how the last portion of my last sentence can make sense. True collectivism
cannot be forced, but must be 100% voluntary and from the spirit and not manipulated into manifesting via "tools", but rather simply discovered in
the heart. True collectivism is not mandatory conformity, but rather has the appearance of such because it is the collective realization of the
individual truth, which is the absolute truth of God - it is simply where you arrive at through rigid and unashamed individualism, but individualism
with HEART and respect for other individuals brought about by rational and emotional maturity (enlightenment) as to the fact that in order to guard
one's individuality it behooves you to zealously guard the right of the individuality of others.