http://www.atheistalliance.org/library/nelson-xtianity_racism.php
Christianity, Racism, and Slavery
by Jon Nelson
Christianity, Racism, and Slavery
by Jon Nelson
Last edited by a moderator:
Christianity, Racism and Slavery
- Thread starter peta9
- Start date
Christianity and Violence
It's rather ironic that a religion which so publicly proclaims Absolute Love as its basis should, over the course of history, spawn so much unmitigated hatred and violence. Is it simply that Christianity is a failure in inspiring better conduct from otherwise hopelessly evil human beings, or is there some aspect of Christianity which in fact encourages or promotes some of the baser aspects of human behavior? Perhaps it is a bit of both.
Concern about rampant violence has become ever more central in public discussions in America recently, especially where it involves the nation's youth. Recent incidents of brutal and deadly attacks by children against children have prompted an intense debate as to the cause and solutions for what is perceived as degenerating culture. It is rather ironic that the increase in attention happens at a time when actual incidents of violence are decreasing. Not only are the general statistics of violence showing a dramatic decrease with increasing rates of decrease, but even violence against children is decreasing.
But it is a truism that exceptional cases make for bad law and bad legal precedents. Following along in parallel, the exceptional cases of youth violence are being used by opportunistic politicians and religious leaders to create genuinely bad laws. Simple people are searching for simple causes and simple solutions.
The simplest among them immediately claim that the cause for youth violence must be the lack of government supported religion in children's lives, so their natural conclusion is that our government should increase its involvement with religion. And not just any religion - Christianity is the first and usually only choice. Practical policy suggestions include daily prayers, bible readings, and the ever popular posting of the Ten Commandments.
It would perhaps be unacceptable in some circles to point out the fact that in many European countries, religion plays an even smaller role in people's lives than it does in America - yet levels of violence are lower than here. Were a lack of religion any sort of cause of violence, then we would find higher amounts of violence in countries like Germany rather than Ireland, where both religion and violence have been prominent in daily life.
Facts like this must lead any rational person to treat claim of religion as a solution to our ills - real or perceived - with real skepticism. Religion has in fact done even more to promote base inhumanity when it has become wedded to ruling political powers. It has been a common pattern throughout human history that wherever religious dogmas have gained worldly power, violence was abetted rather than stopped. Even if a person were to successfully argue that none of the violence was caused by religion, the fact would remain that religion not only failed to stop it, but has actually served as a useful tool for those perpetuating it.
Is Christianity only a religion of Peace and Love? I do not think that anyone can honestly and objectively examine American or European history and answer "yes" to that question. Christianity can encourage Peace and Love - but it certainly need not, and it quite often has done just the opposite. Although the people responsible for violence might have found a way to express their hatred without Christianity, it cannot be ignored that Christianity offers a convenient divine mandate for hatred and violent acts against a wide range of people.
As a reference for those who find that it is sometimes necessary to education others about the history of violence associated with Christianity, below is a list of links to various eras and incidents. In each case, religion has served as a principle catalyst for the violence or has, at the very least, assisted in justifying and perpetuating that violence.
It's rather ironic that a religion which so publicly proclaims Absolute Love as its basis should, over the course of history, spawn so much unmitigated hatred and violence. Is it simply that Christianity is a failure in inspiring better conduct from otherwise hopelessly evil human beings, or is there some aspect of Christianity which in fact encourages or promotes some of the baser aspects of human behavior? Perhaps it is a bit of both.
Concern about rampant violence has become ever more central in public discussions in America recently, especially where it involves the nation's youth. Recent incidents of brutal and deadly attacks by children against children have prompted an intense debate as to the cause and solutions for what is perceived as degenerating culture. It is rather ironic that the increase in attention happens at a time when actual incidents of violence are decreasing. Not only are the general statistics of violence showing a dramatic decrease with increasing rates of decrease, but even violence against children is decreasing.
But it is a truism that exceptional cases make for bad law and bad legal precedents. Following along in parallel, the exceptional cases of youth violence are being used by opportunistic politicians and religious leaders to create genuinely bad laws. Simple people are searching for simple causes and simple solutions.
The simplest among them immediately claim that the cause for youth violence must be the lack of government supported religion in children's lives, so their natural conclusion is that our government should increase its involvement with religion. And not just any religion - Christianity is the first and usually only choice. Practical policy suggestions include daily prayers, bible readings, and the ever popular posting of the Ten Commandments.
It would perhaps be unacceptable in some circles to point out the fact that in many European countries, religion plays an even smaller role in people's lives than it does in America - yet levels of violence are lower than here. Were a lack of religion any sort of cause of violence, then we would find higher amounts of violence in countries like Germany rather than Ireland, where both religion and violence have been prominent in daily life.
Facts like this must lead any rational person to treat claim of religion as a solution to our ills - real or perceived - with real skepticism. Religion has in fact done even more to promote base inhumanity when it has become wedded to ruling political powers. It has been a common pattern throughout human history that wherever religious dogmas have gained worldly power, violence was abetted rather than stopped. Even if a person were to successfully argue that none of the violence was caused by religion, the fact would remain that religion not only failed to stop it, but has actually served as a useful tool for those perpetuating it.
Is Christianity only a religion of Peace and Love? I do not think that anyone can honestly and objectively examine American or European history and answer "yes" to that question. Christianity can encourage Peace and Love - but it certainly need not, and it quite often has done just the opposite. Although the people responsible for violence might have found a way to express their hatred without Christianity, it cannot be ignored that Christianity offers a convenient divine mandate for hatred and violent acts against a wide range of people.
As a reference for those who find that it is sometimes necessary to education others about the history of violence associated with Christianity, below is a list of links to various eras and incidents. In each case, religion has served as a principle catalyst for the violence or has, at the very least, assisted in justifying and perpetuating that violence.
Wrong.
Natural selection/survival of the fittest has caused more death and suffering than any other single factor.
Religion doesn't cause war, people cause war and use religion as a tool for the power of the means to achieve their ends - the same as they do with politics, fear, racism, xenophobia and anything else they can manipulate people with into an "Us against Them" mentality.
Religion isn't "evil". Some people are evil and some people are fools, the evil manipulate the fools to kill other fools being manipulated by other evil people.
Religion isn't "evil". Some people are evil and some people are fools, the evil manipulate the fools to kill other fools being manipulated by other evil people.
So the majority religious idiots are "survival of the fittest", right.
I don't think so, it's more the way the cookie crumbles in an asshat universe.
I think the two articles summed that up except religion does play a role in this case due to it's negative doctrines, lol.
The first article starts with a false claim.
Wrong.
Such an assertion is a clear example of the logical fallacy of begging the question.
Very well then.
We agree that it is indeed that natural selection/survival of the fittest has caused more death and suffering than any other single factor - not "religion."
As the peta9 has declared, that's "the way the cookie crumbles in an asshat universe."
It's the precepts when married to a 'god' concept.
So in essence, he's leaning toward correctness concerning these types of ideas.
You don't see buddhists killing others do you? Not that it's perfect but there are other philosphies that are more enlightened.
I would agree with him that fundamental religion is inferior and appeals to the basest emotions.
Last edited:
I disagree that the disingenous connotation of fitness applies here. As if you were actually intelligent or intellectually honest you would see that "inferiority" can also win out. There are far more stupid people.
As per the notion of "natural selection/survival of the fittest," the "inferior" ones are those who are not fit to survive.
Your dispute is with the concept of "natural selection/survival of the fittest."
Natural selection has to do with the dynamic and conceptual lack of foresight in nature as well.
That's why the inferior can also take down the superior in ideology. Because it is about groups not individuals. If a group is not evolved as a certain individual, by the structure of the universe the sheer number can take down a superior animal or idea. And also vice versa, sometimes the greater group is correct.
It's happened before to individuals and groups. There is also more than one type of superiority. Dominance and prevalence is one, quality or value is subject to interpretation and altogether another matter.
Last edited:
Yes, actually.
Have you ever heard of "AUM Shinrikyo"?
By the way, in my opinion, whether or not Buddhism is a "religion" is up for debate.
Fitness and intelligence are not necessarily the same thing.
You seem to have a flawed view of what "Survival of the Fittest" is.
You could say it's a philosophy.
I'm just pointing out 'fitness' is also subject to the questionable flaws of the universe in that regard.
Hence, our conceptual mind and our constant modifications.
Monotheism breads stupidity and stupid people are easily led off to war. Even a clever person on these forums once excused the killing of one people by another as justified because the other people were polytheists.
Perhaps Buddhism isn't a religion or perhaps it is - Thai Buddhists seem quite religious.
Perhaps Buddhism isn't a religion or perhaps it is - Thai Buddhists seem quite religious.
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
Thats an aspect of nature... you cant compare that to religion !
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
Nukes aren't evil either, so why are we trying to get rid of them ?