you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The great thing about philosophy is the ability to remain open to debate and to scrutinize our understanding of where we stand in the universe and how we should live our lives. Morality is complicated, but not reliant on religion. In fact I'd argue that many religious morals of the time they were written are generally understood to be immoral by today's standards. Religion does not allow itself to be scrutinized. The written word is unbreakable, and it is offensive to open discussion as to the validity of the morals taught from within the texts. The exception to the rule being when a point is raised that might be deemed harmful to religious reputation, it's suddenly 'out of context' or 'not to be taken literally'. This method of communication is demeaning to the questioner of religious morality.

The only way I can see as a working model, as has been the case in philosophy for thousands of years, is to make sure we allow open debate, freedom of expression and freedom of opinion. Religion generally attempts to impede all of these and denies the opportunity to revise or adapt, they are stuck in the dark ages and refuse to move forward. We must persist in enabling the right to challenge concepts that harm philosophical discussion. Religion should never be allowed to have the power to influence politics, media or military conflict. It should be encouraged to be kept in the privacy of the home and the religious meeting ground, out of harm's way where it can't continue to be responsible for evil shit.