"The greatest tragedy in mankind's entire history may be the hijacking of morality by religion." -- Arthur C. Clarke

submitted by muellermeierschulz from self.quotes

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]PeddaKondappa 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (3 children)

So you think all non-religious people are inherently evil?

No, but I think all non-religious people are incapable of articulating why their moral beliefs are objectively true, and other moral beliefs are objectively false. As a result, I believe that non-religious people will more easily fall for propaganda pushed by elites due to a lack of grounding in objective moral truths, resulting in rapid shifts in the moral landscape of society. For example, just a few decades ago the very concept of "gay marriage" was viewed as totally aberrant by average people, and the only people who supported this were some deviants who also supported abolishing all age of consent laws (like the sodomite French "intellectual" Michel Foucault). But now, within my own lifetime, virtually all normies in the West have come to accept gay marriage as not only acceptable, but a "human right" that must be upheld my violent force if necessary. Regardless of what you think about such a massive shift in morality, do you think a highly religious society would have shifted their morals so easily?

This not mean, however, that all religious people are "good people" or that all non-religious people are "bad people." Rather, my point is that religious people can argue for the objectivity of their moral beliefs, and thus not be swept up by the zeitgeist. That's why the only people in the West who still have a strong moral code that is resistant to elite propaganda are ultra-traditional religious communities, like the Amish and Mennonites. Their morality is objective and unchanging, not subjective or relativistic, and does not change according to the whims and fancies of the time. And the ultimate basis of their steadfast morality is the creed of Monotheism, of a singular, eternal, divine Creator whose Word is coterminous with Natural Law. (Note that I am not even a Christian, so do not interpret my statements as some kind of Christian propaganda)

[–]magnora7 7 insightful - 4 fun7 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 4 fun -  (2 children)

No, but I think all non-religious people are incapable are articulating why their moral beliefs are objectively true, and other moral beliefs are objectively false.

Well that's rather a priori if you're a christian because you believe god has to be at the center of everything, so anyone who doesn't say the same seems lost to you. That's a kind of circular reasoning.

Religious societies are very easy to hijack in to a war stance. Especially when their religion has primed them to be a victim or a martyr, and primed them with the idea they need to "fight back". You simply tell two different religions this same thing, and then you have endless wars to fund the banks and military-industrial complexes.

The problem isn't religiousness or lack of religiousness, the problem is people let their minds get hijacked by others. Then they're easy to control by those who want to control others. This can happen in a religious or a non-religious context.

[–]PeddaKondappa 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

I am not a Christian. I have clearly specified that in my post.

I agree that people can easily have their minds "hijacked" by religions or other ideologies. That's because the majority of people in any society (especially the women) are normies who will blindly follow the reigning orthodoxy for social acceptance and validation, whether that be some religion or some other ideology like Communism, Nazism, Liberalism, etc. The difference is that religion, particularly Abrahamic religion, implies as a necessary consequence the existence of an objective moral law that is above and beyond any secular rules or authorities. Thus, highly religious Christians and Muslims would never accept the legitimacy of any modernist regime, while most atheists would happily accede to the New World Order.

By the way, the dominant ideology used to justify wars in the modern world is not religion, but liberalism. Most wars in the modern era are justified based on "human rights" and "defending democracy," not "We are true believers and our enemies believe in a false God." The Western wars in the Middle East are essentially liberal crusades, couched in liberal language. Their purported goal is to "liberate oppressed people from dictatorial regimes." I have seen constant agitation by liberal scum for sanctions and even military action against Iran, on the grounds that "the evil Iranian regime oppresses women and gays." And this language is highly effective on most liberal Westerners, who, even if they otherwise oppose war for humanitarian or other reasons, nonetheless support regime change in Iran and other such places. So if you are truly so concerned about the propaganda employed by the ruling elite to justify war and sanctions, then you should renounce the liberal language of "human rights" and the Enlightenment concepts that they are ultimately based on.

[–]JasonCarswell 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

" while most atheists would happily accede to the New World Order. "

Pulled out of your ass with nothing to back it up.

While I'm first to admit that doubting an invisible impotent God is the lowest hanging fruit on for skeptics to pick and many don't doubt beyond this, at least they're doubting and not sheeple herded by our Lord and Shepherd. Any skeptic worth their senses and reason will also be wary of authority in all other forms - including the corporatocracy and their New Normal World Order.

All wars are started by false flags (deceptive lies) by Machiavellian (liar) war mongers. That doesn't mean that human rights and democracy are bad things. It means the masses are not skeptical enough to see through the hypocritical manipulation and are having their good natures taken advantage of by evil "leaders". Liberals come in all flavours, from scum to saints, like all of humanity. The liberalism is only for the ruling class' corporatocracy who simply want to be free to take what they want.