DSenette wrote:just realized i need to clarify this. this is in regards to people who claim religion as their only reasons for such things, or at least are the only reasons for their actions that they will give.
a LOT of people will only respond with "because it's against god" (whatever that means) when you ask them why they don't like homosexuality. not a lot of people will only respond with "because it makes jesus happy" when you ask them why they donate to charity.
I imagine the former types of questions get asked a lot more because people expect better justification for those more contentious topics, and thus we're more likely to hear those types of answers in the public sphere. However, I'm not convinced that religious people only rarely
say "because God wants me to" when asked to defend why they donate. Though in the end I can only speculate from my own personal experience. Also from personal experience, I know people that might say "because it's a nice thing to do" without explicitly deferring to God because they're nervous about speaking of their religion in front of others when they don't know how they believe. What people openly state may not always reflect what they actually believe. (And as a side point, what people believe may not always reflect what causal relationship is actually happening.)
Griffin wrote:Well, let's be honest, this is kind of human nature. Anything you do that others find objectionable is imposed on you by an outside force (even if you fully embrace it), while anything you do that others think is awesome is totally all you, totally your idea, you are super awesome thankyouverymuch.
Not generally true, of course, but it certainly explains why people use their religion (or their job, or other obligations, or their research group) to justify some downright atrocious behaviour, while downplaying when those same impulses earn them accolades.
First of all, this might explain a trend, but the claim is that it rarely
happens. I'd say we need more than appeals to human nature to make that strong of a statement. Also, if it's just human nature, how does that reflect poorly on religion?
Second, I'm not so sure that people would be so quick to dump on something they hold so dear. I have heard people blame religion in the sense of "That was back when I was with this other church that focused too much on legalism". But this is blaming another religious group, not blaming their religion.
Third, this type of behavior makes sense when someone agrees that blames needs to be assigned and they want to make sure it points elsewhere. They share some common sense that something bad happened. But does it apply when there's disagreement that they're doing anything wrong? For example, when people decry same-sex marriage as an abomination to God, is that the same type of example of passing the buck?
Finally, I'm not sure how important any of this is. I was asking DSenette if he was consistent with both the good and the bad stuff since inconsistency is really the only complaint I can level. But this is just his moral opinion on how responsibility should be placed. Even If he wants to wag his finger at religion over this type of stuff, it still
doesn't mean that one needs to get rid of religion to fix the problems.
Whizzkid1024 wrote:Well, I think we could agree on the abortion part.
I didn't expect that, but I'm glad to hear it.
krogoth wrote:Especially when the only reason they are doing it is to get good stuff in their after life.
Yup, and just last night I went to one of those religious meetings where we discussed how we could all get a bigger piece of that sky cake. With extra frosting and sprinkles! Yum!
A gentle answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger.