Skip to main content

Inspired by "Is religion a force for good in the world?" - the debates with Christopher Hitchens

Let's compare general religious tenets with general humanistic tenets: I assert that to be a good humanist you must follow the rules.  To be a good religious person you must break the rules.

Religious:                                            Humanistic:
love thy neighbor                                 love thy neighbor
do good works                                     do good works
live according to the scriptures            live according to what can be drawn from evidence (science)
try to follow the dictates of god           try to figure out the best dictates for existence

A "good" religious person (by today's standards) must give up some of the dogma and retain the moderate tenets .  Indeed, fundamentalist following of  the most barbaric demands of scriptures is discarded by most modern believers.  A "bad" religious person follows those tenets.  Even the Westboro Baptist Church leaders rationalize why they don't follow all of Leviticus and only focus on the anti-gay verses.

 (I saw an explanation from an adherent of the WBC claim that those parts of Leviticus that forbad wearing clothing made from two different cloths, or stoning your neighbor if he worked on the Sabbath, etc. were rules pertinent to the times rather than laws of faith.  I wonder when the times changed.  No one that I know of ever said god made it known.  Did it happen on Oct. 4, 1103, or July 22, 671?  When I was a child, I was told that eating meat on Friday was a mortal sin, punishable by eternity in hell.  Then came the Vatican Council II of the 1960's.  I believe it was when I was in 7th or 8th grade at St. Bernadette's Catholic school that eternal damnation was removed from that equation. In fact, it was no longer even a venial (lesser) sin).  

So, fundamentalists must figure out ways to reinterpret the "divinely inspired" verses that are completely out of place in today's world, rather than letting them go.

A "good" humanist can have beliefs.  For example, I believe that it is better for the economy of a nation to have 40,000 millionaires rather than 1 person with $40 billion.  It is rather difficult and subjective to prove that, thus it is a belief and not a scientific truth.  If an economist were to demonstrate to me that I am wrong, then I should change my belief. 

One of my newly favorite aphorisms is this:  When an honest man discovers that he is mistaken, he will either cease to be mistaken or cease to be honest.  A good humanist is one who follows the tenets of humanism.  A "bad" one is one who doesn't, precisely because one of the principle tenets is that a belief should be amended or discarded when evidence shows it to be wrong.

It seems that religious people are free to go either way.

- PeteBarkett.blogspot.com
07/15/18

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

That's How the Light Gets In On Economic Perspective $Million per day My argument in today's blog is that the rich, especially the ultra-rich do not need protection from people advocating redistribution of wealth downward.   I'm recalling "Joe, the Plumber", (who was not named Joe and was not a plumber) who was used by a conservative Presidential candidate to exemplify that liberals would try to tax away the opportunity to start a business and become wealthy.  Also, I've been accused of being a conspiracy theorist when I've complained that the ultra-wealthy collude to protect and increase their massive wealth.    So, I'll address three issues at once: 1.  Are we trying to deprive the wealthy of their lifestyle? 2.  Do ultra-wealthy have the time, resources, and inclination to conspire to strongly influence politics and economics? 3.  To get an idea of economics in general, it helps to have an understanding of wealth. ...
1 comment
Read more
On Past Judgements Don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you've got til it's gone.  - Joni Mitchell In the 1976 Presidential election, I voted for John Anderson.  I was then, and still am, a liberal.  So, Gerald Ford was not a consideration, especially after he pardoned Nixon, which was unforgivable.  But I didn't trust Jimmy Carter, who claimed to be honest.  I didn't know much about the Southern Baptist Convention, but what I did know was that they opposed most everything that I supported.  Carter was a Southern Baptist, so Carter was out.  Four years later, I had changed my mind, and I enthusiastically supported Carter against Reagan, and over the years I grew to appreciate him more and more. Carter turned out to be much more honest and thoughtful than the average politician.   And he was open to change.  He recently left the Southern Baptist Convention after 60 years due to their belief that women should ...
Post a Comment
Read more
  The Trump Legend        What is the Trump story?   It will be quite different for followers and detractors.   I believe the reason that so many people can have completely opposite views of the same person and events lies in great part to our American, and perhaps human, myths.       I had occasion once to be watching a televangelist in the company of some fundamentalist in-laws.   Seeing this person crying while singing a hymn, I thought he was the phoniest person I had ever seen.   But one of my wife's aunts turned to me and said, "Isn't he the most sincere person you've ever seen?"   I didn't answer, but it occurred to me that we were sitting in the same room watching the same event with completely opposite views.   I love studying history, but I am now more careful to try and research the historian.       Some of us like to believe in heroic leaders following their ...
Post a Comment
Read more