Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Michael M who wrote (69817)	1/1/2000 3:43:00 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 108807

IT is NOT true that the only religious group scorned on this thread is Christian. I (personally) scorn all organized forms of worship, and have said so numerous times (Muslim, Hindu, whatever)- even my own- Unitarian, which isn't much of a worship since most of the congregation seems to be atheist. In fact I scorn almost all aggregates of humanity- humans by themselves are almost always preferable to humans in groups. Scorn is actually not the right word- I suspect all aggregates of humanity to be capable of persecution, and since history is full of examples I feel comfortable with that position and that suspicion makes me dislike the aggregates and dogmatic believers in the aggregates. I feel that way about all religions, all governmental bodies, all institutions public and private- an individual alone usually has a conscience, a group doesn't (imo). I will always prefer the individual. I am of the opinion that the most moral man is the man who can have empathy for other creatures and other men without the fear of a Deities reprisal, or be "good" because the tantalizing carrot of an afterlife is dangled before his nose. I can't imagine a more estimable creature than a man that does as little harm as possible merely because he sees that as a rational path.

To: Michael M who wrote (69817)	1/1/2000 4:46:00 PM
From: Grainne	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

<<Christine, I can't agree that religion offers little to society. Perhaps "society" isn't the right word, though.>> Michael, if Christianity offers so much to society, then how do you account for it also causing so much harm and hatred? Would you agree that arguments can be made on either side of this issue? <<Very few cultures, large or small, without some basis in "religion". Without Christianity, European history and culture would be unrecognizable to us. I think it has been a positive. Without it, relatively painless dentistry might still be a thousand years in the future. Think about that!>> European history and culture is not the only thing in life. Much harm has been done by this culture. In America we are a Euro-centric culture, but in the eyes of the rest of the planet's peoples (a distinct majority), European culture has been extremely damaging. I am unclear as to the connection with relative painless dentistry. If we all ate totally natural diets, without that wicked European-developed white flour and white sugar, perhaps we would need far less dentistry. <<No civilization is possible with acceptance and enforcement of common value. Many who wail about keeping a wall between government and religion seem to forget that government has its roots in religion.>> This assumes that religion's influence is benevolent. It is not, except to the believers of that particular religion. Common value can be a belief in human and civil rights, for example, without any religion at all. <<In a real sense we're all a bit shy of the dark -- the night, the unknown and the BIG dark -- death. Men and/or women have exploited our need for "explanations" ever since we could communicate. Some have been sincere and true to purpose. Others, quite naturally, as groups grew larger, as people settled, as surplus became possible and contact between groups became inevitable, became powerful figures who led in the name of this God or that.>> Not everyone needs to feel that there are any answers, or that they are going to Heaven, or that life extends beyond our experiences here. Some people seem to need religion, and some do not. This seems to be a good argument for the separation of church and state. <<With the passage of time we have moved from fright of the divine to the divine right of kings (holy and unholy) to focus on the rights of individual humans (and, other living things). In some ways, I see the extreme of this as a divide and disintegrate movement. I do not think it bodes especially well.>> Are you saying that respect of individuality, and individual rights, is a negative? <<FWIW, my own opinion is that neither Hitler or other Germans turned on the Jews because they were NOT Christian, but because they WERE Jews -- a readily identifiable group who often held themselves to be different and thus provided a least objectionable scapegoat for German problems. I am no holocaust revisionist, but it is useful to remember that Jews were not the ONLY people brutalized in the camps.>> The Pope has formally apologized for the Church looking the other way while the Jews were slaughtered in Hitler's Germany, and has acknowledged that hatred of the Jews is based on the Bible. The other groups in Germany--the gypsies and homosexuals, for example--were outcastes also persecuted by the Christians, historically speaking. The Jews were outcastes BECAUSE of Christian hatred of them; they did not choose to the this way. It strikes me as a chicken-and-egg argument that you are making, but I believe you have it backwards. <<Christine, I would never dream of suggesting you would be a better or more moral person if you were a Christian. Whatever is working for you is just fine by me. But, although you write in a more congenial manner than some on this subject -- I do detect a hint that I (and others of my ilk) might be better or more moral persons if we were NOT Christian. That seems odd to me.>> I think society would be far better off if it were not dominated by Christians. I think it is important to point this out occasionally, because some Christians seem to think they have most of the answers, and I do not find their impact on civilization to be benevolent. I would never dream of trying to change someone's Christian belief system, but I would hope that in historical and societal terms, they might see a broader picture. <<I am a Christian. I am a conservative. I do not foment hate crimes. I do not practice bigotry. And, I am certainly not a member of the KKK. I have spent much of my life living and traveling outside the United States, often among people who were "different" from me. Saints and sinners of all colors, beliefs and customs surround us.>> Some people commit hate crimes in Jesus' name. I think they are very sick, but they claim to be Christians. I am only pointing out this out, not asserting that you do these things. I am sure that you do not. <<For some reason the ONLY religious group scorned on this thread seems to be Christians -- I would be curious just what your definition of bigotry is.>> Bigotry is unreasonable hatred against any group of people. I do not think open discussions fall into this definition. <<I am listening to "All the Best Greek Bouzoukis." Hard to be very angry with anyone while remembering/dreaming of sunny days and the deep blue sea. Maybe October.>> Please tell me about Greece. I would love to hear more.