Re: virus: Does God Exist?

ken sartor (
Wed, 28 Aug 1996 09:28:35 -0500

At 02:57 PM 8/27/96 BST, wrote:

>I don't think, personally, that you can be too alarmist about the danger of
>religion. When I get into this side of the argument (that is, why I have an
>especial dislike of religions), I always end up upsetting someone. I'll
try not
>to be insulting, but by the very nature of what I'm going to say may well take
>a dig at someone's personal beliefs, with the by product of being offensive.
>My first problem with religion (and at this stage, the existance of God is
>irrelevant), is that it seeks ultimate control over the people. It is capable
>of coercion by threats of what happens to you after you die, or what nasty
>things God will do to you to make your life worse. I'm not refering
>specifically to Christianity here either. My knowledge of less mainstream
>religionsis not good, but as far as I'm aware the only two that don't fit into
>this _generalisation_ are Voodoo and Paganism. As far as I'm concerned,
>religion is merely another system of power, just like the government. The
>only difference is that we elect our government, and so their exercise of
>power over us is legitimate, while that of the church is illegitimate.

Seems to me that religion is *even more* egalitarian than governnent.
We each get to pick our own, custom belief system... (In this
country there are no churchs exerting overt control over my life.)

>This kind of ties in with my second point. I know that every society requires
>some kind of moral code for it to exist in relative harmony. If there were no
>moral code, then either a state of Anarchy would exist, or the government would
>have to be much more harsh to maintain order. The problem is that many
>religions (and I admit that I'm generalising again, but there's no other way
>to put this) impose unreasonable moral restraints on its participants.

Churchs can tell you what to do, think, or whatever, but control
over each persons life rests within themselves. (No one holds
a gun over your head - just, perhaps, eternal damnation ;) )

>For example: No sex before marriage - hence must be married to be allowed
> children - fair? I think not.
> Do not eat Pork - I can't see any reason for this at all, and
> the argument that says Pigs are dirty
> animals is wrong, because they're
> actually some of the cleanest!
> Homosexuality is wrong - some people will still say it is, even
> if it doesn't affect their lives at all.
> Those people, in my eyes, are narrow-
> minded, and pathetic. People can do
> whatever they want as long as they don't
> force it on other people.

Hey, i think if someone wants to believe in any of this stuff, let
them. Gee, if you want to, you can hate me for believing this
(this is not an encouragement to do so :-) ). Just as long as
they keep there hands to themselves (as my kindergarten teacher
once said).

Religion. Big topic. Some religions are not about control but
rather self control. Seeking to be one with the surroundings -
seeking out ones inner strength. Some religions by their natures
are treating the disiples as children (god as father). We all
have choices to make - choose.

Someone brought up nazis. Should we ban them? Skinheads?
Feminists? ACLU members? KKK'ers? Gee what would we ever do
if telepathy ever existed? Thought police would not be far

I believe in the marketplace of ideas. Not because it is good -
only because all alternatives i can imagine are worse.