Religion IS crazy!

[Sean K]

They'll ignore that report of course

We can't afford for that to happen MrB. Our collective will of natural justice, democracy, human rights, freedom of expression, respect of individual belief, protection of children and equality, should hold us steady. The moment we introduce a new law subjecating a minority, or women, or children, is the day we have lost our soul as the Australian nation. I'm terribly concerned I will see something like it in my life time.

(Disregard the fact we only gave Aboriginals the right to vote a few decades ago...)

 

[Julia]

As for your other question about the moral compass, I'd be happy to answer later but I have to go for now. It is a subject very close to me and one that I think we see very differently on.

Duckman

Duckman, I'm disappointed that you haven't followed through with your promise to discuss how your personal moral compass is set by the church, given the very obvious misalignment of the church's own moral compass.

 

[Duckman#72]

Duckman, I'm disappointed that you haven't followed through with your promise to discuss how your personal moral compass is set by the church, given the very obvious misalignment of the church's own moral compass.

Sorry for the delay Julia.

In my opinion we all need values to live by. It just so happens that I chose to live by the values of the Church. Like it or not........at least these are set standards to live by. "Life expectations" if you like. Whether you agree with them is another issue but at least at a young age we are encouraged to live by a set of rules. All too often, and I've seen it within my own family, where the values of the Church are specifically shunned, no set values take their place. This is my concern. Don't automatically assume that another set of ethical values are there to take the place of Church values......sometimes it just means an individual devoid of values altogether.

Tech a wrote on another thread..."Humans need direction, order, compassion and authority". Whether it is acknowledged or not, these are the values taught through the Church. I realize that there have been horrific atrocities committed by members of the Church, however I am pragmatic enough to realize that these were the doings and failings of sick, sadistic individuals. They were not the teachings of the Church.

It is estimated that over 50% of sexual abuse cases are perpetrated by direct family or friends of the victim. How sad that these victims don't get to experience the beautiful unconditional bonds formed within the majority of loving families. Imagine being abused by your own father/brother, yet we realize this isn't the norm......and we continue to look for strong, loving relationships in which to raise our families. Same could be said about scouts, or schools - evil predators abound in all forms of life, however I understand that it is much easier to distinguish between the individual and the organization when a Church is not involved.

There are many, many fine individuals who have "their own" values, however if you dig deeply I think you'll find that the majority of the values they hold are the same position as those of the Church.

Cheers
Duckman

 

[Julia]

In my opinion we all need values to live by.

Agree. I'm not sure, though, how much these values are formed by some extrinsic dictate like a church, how much by childhood modelling and guidance via parenting/education etc., and how much is just intrinsic, an instinctive understanding that - if we expect to live in a civilised society - then we have personal responsibility toward making it so. A version of 'do unto others as you would have them do unto you' if you like.

It just so happens that I chose to live by the values of the Church. Like it or not........at least these are set standards to live by. "Life expectations" if you like. Whether you agree with them is another issue but at least at a young age we are encouraged to live by a set of rules.

OK, but my point is that a set of rules (standards) apply across the whole of society, that's why we have laws and punishments for breaking them. Similar 'rules' exist in all structures, ie sporting organisations, workplaces, volunteer involvements. So I'm not really understanding from your post where the set of values specifically offered by the catholic church (even if some of the representatives and hierarchy of that church don't live by such values themselves) is actually different from the given rules most of us make an essential structure of our lives.

All too often, and I've seen it within my own family, where the values of the Church are specifically shunned, no set values take their place. This is my concern. Don't automatically assume that another set of ethical values are there to take the place of Church values......sometimes it just means an individual devoid of values altogether.

Yes, sometimes it does. Human beings are not all alike. We value order and morality to different extents.

Tech a wrote on another thread..."Humans need direction, order, compassion and authority".

That's a reasonable comment but it didn't specifically refer to any particular institution having a monopoly on the understanding of such tenets.

Whether it is acknowledged or not, these are the values taught through the Church.

Just as they are taught by many schools and by decent parents, regardless of any religious affiliations.

I realize that there have been horrific atrocities committed by members of the Church, however I am pragmatic enough to realize that these were the doings and failings of sick, sadistic individuals. They were not the teachings of the Church.

It has been the Church which has covered up this hideous behaviour for decades and that's the subject of my cynicism and criticism.

It is estimated that over 50% of sexual abuse cases are perpetrated by direct family or friends of the victim. How sad that these victims don't get to experience the beautiful unconditional bonds formed within the majority of loving families.

Abuse by one family member does not wipe out the love and support from the rest of the family.

Imagine being abused by your own father/brother,

I don't need to imagine it, Duckman. It does not render the entire family abusive or invalid.
Offenders - when reported - are punished. Their crimes are not covered up, permitting them to go on abusing others year after year.

There are many, many fine individuals who have "their own" values, however if you dig deeply I think you'll find that the majority of the values they hold are the same position as those of the Church.

Which is pretty much what I'm saying above. i.e. that one does not need a religious belief to hold decent moral and ethical values, and further, that the Church has been hugely hypocritical in preaching all things good and decent while perpetuating horrible abuse on innocent children.

I'm not arguing with your enjoyment of your religion, Duckman. If it contributes to your sense of OK-ness and offers a moral framework for you, then that's fine. I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy of the organisation and questioning how ordinary catholics can retain their faith in the church in such circumstances.

 

[Ruby]

Duckman, you have fallen into the same illogical rehetoric employed by everyone who defends the behaviour of the church.

In my opinion we all need values to live by. It just so happens that I chose to live by the values of the Church. Like it or not........at least these are set standards to live by.

This is my concern. Don't automatically assume that another set of ethical values are there to take the place of Church values......sometimes it just means an individual devoid of values altogether.

Tech a wrote on another thread..."Humans need direction, order, compassion and authority". Whether it is acknowledged or not, these are the values taught through the Church.

These "values of the church" are the same values and moral code that all decent people live by. They existed long before the christian religion and the church were invented. They did not originate with the church, nor are they "owned" by the church. I am tired of hearing about "church values" and "christian values" as though it is necessary to belong to church in order to have a good set of "values" and a moral code to live by. Do you suggest that the moral values taught to you by your church are in any way better or diffent than the moral code of atheist - simply because he is an atheist? That is not logical.

I realize that there have been horrific atrocities committed by members of the Church, however I am pragmatic enough to realize that these were the doings and failings of sick, sadistic individuals. They were not the teachings of the Church.

As Julia said in her excellent post, it is the fact that the church has covered up, denied, protected these atrocities, and knowingly allowed them to continue unabated that makes us so angry and disgusted. This is something you don't address, and not does Tink, who made similar comments a few days ago. I am afraid you are in denial too.

It is estimated that over 50% of sexual abuse cases are perpetrated by direct family or friends of the victim. .......

Same could be said about scouts, or schools - evil predators abound in all forms of life, however I understand that it is much easier to distinguish between the individual and the organization when a Church is not involved......

This is another red herring thrown in (also used by Tink a few days ago). Does the fact that these atrocities are carried out by people outside the church somehow make the church less guilty? I think not. Do you think that it is somehow a mitigating factor? I think not. What other people do outside the church is not relevant to the argument, which is that the catholic church is guilty of a most henious crime for which there is absolutely no defence, and as Julia said, has lost its moral compass.

(My bolds)

 

[Duckman#72]

it is the fact that the church has covered up, denied, protected these atrocities, and knowingly allowed them to continue unabated that makes us so angry and disgusted. This is something you don't address, and not does Tink, who made similar comments a few days ago. I am afraid you are in denial too.

Hello Ruby and Julia,

At the end of the day, I think this sums up your position. It is not about church values but more about the lack of moral response from the church regarding sexual attrocities and how this reconciles with their principles.

I have never suggested that "good values" are the sole domain of the church alone. I agree that a moral code of an atheist may well be exactly the same "in principle" as that of a church going Catholic. I just want people to have an ethical set of moral codes. In my opinion as more and more people shun religion, we are expecting moral values of "decent people" to automatically take its place. I just don't see that happening. My argument is that installing church values at least guarantees an ethical set of values is instilled in kids.

Ruby, you call my arguments illogical. I could say the same to you and Julia. You need to separate the Church and its teachings and values. It was not the Church's values and teachings that molested kids and covered them up for decades/centuries. As much as you love saying "the church" it was ultimately the act of individuals. How can you say i'm living in denial? I agree it happened, I agree it was appalling but if i went around denouncing anybody or any organization that had wronged me or wronged somebody, I would be living in a bubble. As I have said many many times before, I have only ever had positive experiences with my dealings with the Church. What do you want me to do?

Duckman

 

[Tink]

Excellent post Duckman
The Royal Commission is dealing with this and many others...

The good people of the Church are still doing what they have always done and what I have seen
They shouldnt be penalised when they have done nothing wrong.

 

[McLovin]

In my opinion as more and more people shun religion, we are expecting moral values of "decent people" to automatically take its place. I just don't see that happening.

I'm sure your intent was not to cause offense, but I find these sort of statements rather insulting, especially given the "moral values" of many members of the clergy. It would seem having a moral compass has little to do with religion and everything to do with nature and nurture.

It was not the Church's values and teachings that molested kids and covered them up for decades/centuries. As much as you love saying "the church" it was ultimately the act of individuals.

As I have said many many times before, I have only ever had positive experiences with my dealings with the Church. What do you want me to do?

The RCC actively aided paedophile priests by shuffling them around and not alerting police authorities. I think it's absolutely correct to refer to it as "the Church". It was institutionalised criminality.

It's an interesting observation that you disagree with negative experiences being attributed to "the Church" but describe positive dealings with "the Church". Perhaps your positive experiences have ultimately been the act of indivuals, the causation of which has little to do with religion.

There's nothing particularly unique about what Christianity "teaches". That it tries to claim certain traits of human behaviour as being "Christian" is no different to when a politician gets on TV and describes "mateship" as uniquely Australian.

 

[Tink]

I agree with Duckman.
So, is it a better place without religion?
Drugs, alcohol, violence, to name a few

Well I will go back to my post and say, I expect the Catholic Church to stand strong in whats right and wrong and what they believe in....

 

[McLovin]

I agree with Duckman.
So, is it a better place without religion?
Drugs, alcohol, violence, to name a few

America is the most religious developed country in the world. It also has the highest homicide rate of any developed country and the highest drug related death rate. In fact the homicide rate is actually highest in states that form the US Bible Belt, not to mention the racial discrimination and de-facto segregation that still operates in many of these communities.

It's mighty naive to assume that religion is some sort of panacea for the worst of human behaviour. The last 2000 years is evidence of that.

 

[Tink]

Wouldnt have anything to do with guns now would it?
Does the Church agree with that -- NO!
We are talking about the values of the Church, and how much it has changed without it -- marraige, children, families, the list goes on.
I expect them to stand their ground to do with all these decisions.

Where is the moral code in society now?

 

[McLovin]

Wouldnt have anything to do with guns now would it?
Does the Church agree with that -- NO!

Shock horror, people commit actions that the Church say are bad. Quite a head in the sand statement, considering the number of criminal clergy.

We are talking about the values of the Church, and how much it has changed without it -- marraige, children, families, the list goes on.
I expect them to stand their ground to do with all these decisions.

And as they stand their ground on things like contraception in Africa, I expect them to continue to shrink into irrelevancy. Which can't come soon enough, IMO.

I have no doubt that in 100 year's time, the Church's position on many social issues today will seem as ridiculous as when the Church found Galileo to be a heretic for his theory of heliocentricity.

 

[Julia]

And as they stand their ground on things like contraception in Africa, I expect them to continue to shrink into irrelevancy. Which can't come soon enough, IMO.

I have no doubt that in 100 year's time, the Church's position on many social issues today will seem as ridiculous as when the Church found Galileo to be a heretic for his theory of heliocentricity.

+1.
Tink, you seem to be completely ignoring the criminality of the Church in its systematic and prolonged covering up of the appalling abuse of children over decades. Dreadful enough that priests, in their position of trust, engqaged in such behaviour in the first place, but that the Church then moved these people to another area to allow them to actively continue their aberrant ways, just says everything about the 'values' of the Catholic Church to me and many others.

How you can align that with the values of the Church being a code to live by is simply beyond me.

 

[pavilion103]

Maybe a little off topic but one thing I would add is - never judge a system by its abuse. Whether it be religious, philosophical, trading approach.

Someone claiming to act in the name of Christ but acting contrary to his teachings doesn't discredit him but the person acting in his name.
In the same way that if you developed a great trading methodology and someone says they use it but really the don't and they make losses. That discredits them and not you.

No one is perfect and we must acknowledge that, but continued, deliberate and systematic abuse from any church or organization discredits them. In this regard some churches more closely represent Christ than others.

(Who Christ actually was and what the evidence points to is a completely different topic altogether).

 

[McLovin]

Someone claiming to act in the name of Christ but acting contrary to his teachings doesn't discredit him but the person acting in his name.

I don't actually think that is in dispute. The main point Julia, myself and a few others are making is that even if someone is taught "Christian values" that doesn't necessarily make them a better human-being than if they weren't. Nature and nurture shapes a person's values, morals and sense of what is right and wrong far more than religion does, IMO.

 

[DB008]

‘Quarantine her!’ Top Tunisian Islamist says topless girl needs stoning

A Tunisian Salafi preacher has called for a 19-year old girl who posted her topless pictures on Facebook to be “quarantined” and stoned to death before she starts “an epidemic.”

Tunisian newspaper AssabahNews quoted Salafi preacher Alami Adel, who heads the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice, saying: “According to God’s law, she deserves 80 to 100 lashes, but what she committed is worth much more than that. She deserves to be stoned to death and she must be quarantined because what she did is an epidemic.”

“She is like someone suffering from a serious and contagious illness and she must be secluded and treated,” he added.

http://english.alarabiya.net/en/2013/03/23/-Quarantine-her-Top-Tunisian-Islamist-says-topless-girl-needs-stoning.html

 

[FxTrader]

I have never suggested that "good values" are the sole domain of the church alone. I agree that a moral code of an atheist may well be exactly the same "in principle" as that of a church going Catholic. I just want people to have an ethical set of moral codes. In my opinion as more and more people shun religion, we are expecting moral values of "decent people" to automatically take its place. I just don't see that happening. My argument is that installing church values at least guarantees an ethical set of values is instilled in kids.

And so goes the insidious argument for the religious indoctrination of children. Instill religious mythology in the mind of a child and hopefully they will live moral and ethical lives and, cross your fingers, we will have a better society as a result (the end justifies the means). As if bronze age magic books are the best guide available to us today for morality and decency in modern society. Never mind the rest of putrid baggage that goes with religion, the moral code justifies the teaching of the whole canon of man-made magic books as infallible truth written (via inspiration) by an invisible loving sky God.

A.C. Grayling points out the danger "the justifications offered by religious people for their beliefs very often turn out to be post facto rationalisations for something that in its deepest depths is non-rational – something emotional, traditional, its roots almost always in the experiences of childhood when trusted adults instilled a religion-involving, and often an explicitly religious, way of viewing the world."

"With regard to the good things attributed to religion – the consolation and inspiration it provides, which it provides even if it is false – the critics of religion have a view. It is that there are other and better sources of these valuable things, which have the additional merit of being far better grounded in reason and a more accurate understanding of the world – which is in short to say: are far closer to the truth."

Finally... "the argument against religion is an argument for the liberation of the human mind, and the possibility of at last formulating an ethical outlook that all humankind can share, thus providing a basis for a much more integrated and peaceful world."

Exactly, programming the mind of a child with religious dogma thinking you are doing them and society a favor in the process is not just misguided, you're enslaving their mind not expanding it and society is not the better for it. Instilling "church" values guarantees nothing in the future and this is also true about the mythology that underpins such indoctrination.

 

[Ruby]

I just want people to have an ethical set of moral codes. In my opinion as more and more people shun religion, we are expecting moral values of "decent people" to automatically take its place. I just don't see that happening. My argument is that installing church values at least guarantees an ethical set of values is instilled in kids.

Duckman, I want people to have a set of ethical values too, but why do you make the assumption that unless the church teaches them no-one else will? I taught my children a set of values without the help of the church, and they are very fine people. And once again you are calling them 'church values'!!!

Where are you looking? I see moral values being instilled everywhere without the intervention of the church!

No, installing 'church values' does NOT guarantee anything. what nonsense! Many of society's low-lifes have been brought up as catholics. Many high profile criminals are catholics. There is no evidence to back up what you say. It is mere assumption.

It was not the Church's values and teachings that molested kids and covered them up for decades/centuries. As much as you love saying "the church" it was ultimately the act of individuals. How can you say i'm living in denial? I agree it happened, I agree it was appalling but if i went around denouncing anybody or any organization that had wronged me or wronged somebody, I would be living in a bubble. As I have said many many times before, I have only ever had positive experiences with my dealings with the Church. What do you want me to do?

The church from the pope - the top man -down, has covered up and denied its criminal activities for centuries. What I would like you to do - since you ask - is have the courage to stand up and be counted - denounce the hypocrisy.

The good people of the Church are still doing what they have always done and what I have seen
They shouldnt be penalised when they have done nothing wrong.

Tink - no-one has suggested otherwise.

So, is it a better place without religion?
Drugs, alcohol, violence, to name a few

Is the world a worse place without religion? We have always had drugs, alcohol, violence, murder, theft, etc. Read some history! Society was more violent in England in the middle ages, or in Victorian times (to give two examples) than it is now. And that is when everyone 'belonged' to the church.

Well I will go back to my post and say, I expect the Catholic Church to stand strong in whats right and wrong and what they believe in....

That's great.......... except that the catholic church does not do that. The proof is there. The church is two-faced - teaches one thing and does another.

Wouldnt have anything to do with guns now would it?
Does the Church agree with that -- NO!
We are talking about the values of the Church, and how much it has changed without it -- marraige, children, families, the list goes on.
I expect them to stand their ground to do with all these decisions.

Where is the moral code in society now?

Very confusing post Tink, but go back to what I said before. You have no evidence to support what you say.

 

[bellenuit]

Interesting book. Should be worth a read when it comes out.....

The Bonobo and the Atheist

Frans de Waal's Bottom-Up Morality: We're Not Good Because Of God

In a book coming out next week called The Bonobo and the Atheist, primatologist Frans de Waal argues that morality is built into our species. Rather than coming to us top-down from God, or any other external source, morality for de Waal springs bottom-up from our emotions and our day-to-day social interactions, which themselves evolved from foundations in animal societies.

For 30 years, de Waal has authored books about apes and monkey that open our eyes to the bottom-up origins of our human behaviors, ranging from politics to empathy. In this, his 10th volume, he extends that perspective by writing, "It wasn't God who introduced us to morality; rather, it was the other way around. God was put into place to help us live the way we felt we ought to."

more at link......

http://www.npr.org/blogs/13.7/2013/...ttom-up-morality-were-not-good-because-of-god

Check the comments at the end of the article.

 

[Tink]

Oh well, keep dreaming McLovin, The Church is here to stay, its been here for a long time and will stay for a long time. I noticed you didnt answer my last question about 'where is the moral code in society now?', but thats your choice.
We hear so much about the good old days and how the values were so much stronger then within the families...
What happened?
The Church I attend is always full, and Pope Francis is expected to come to Australia in the near future. The Church charities are doing a wonderful job, not just here but worldwide as well, so dont wish away the good in the communities.

Julia, we have all acknowledged the abuse, but I dont believe in throwing out the baby with the bathwater -- we disagree on this topic.
I prefer the values of the Church, and I want them to stand up for what they believe in as being right and wrong.
The Church has always been about families, you may not agree with some of their teachings but for me, its important.
Spiritual leaders are needed, the peacemakers, and they keep things balanced..

This is my view, we have choices and I am glad we do...