3 ms·

The problems you've described are problems with all human organizations, not just churches/religions.

FabHK 7y ago
1. Few human organisations nowadays promote values as bad as most religions. 2. You can be a member of several overlapping organizations, but only one church, normally. So, the problem of losing a community is exacerbated with church.
- toasterlovin 7y ago
  > 1. Few human organisations nowadays promote values as bad as most religions. It sounds like your mind is inhabited by a caricature of religion, rather than a realistic conception of the thing. For instance, our neighborhood church uses their facilities to provide (secular) services to the local community. They also organize a monthly service day where community members (not just their congregation) provide help to people in need. Many other churches do similar things. And there is a reason why so many hospitals in the U.S. have religious names: they were started by churches. If you want to hold religion to account for the bad that they contribute, you also have to give them credit for the good. And I think once you start doing that, you'll find that it's all pretty much a wash.
  - UI_at_80x24 7y ago
    >If you want to hold religion to account for the bad that they contribute, you also have to give them credit for the good. And I think once you start doing that, you'll find that it's all pretty much a wash. Bullshit Commit mass genocide? That's ok look at these shiny new automobiles. The continued rape of HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of children? That's ok, we taught them math. You probably blame women for getting raped (What was she wearing? Why was she out alone at night?) instead of blaming men for raping. Until all of these institutions are brought down and eradicated the "damaging good" will continue.
    - toasterlovin 7y ago
      Look, I'm the last person to make excuses for the Catholic Church (I'm guessing that's what you were referring to), but the sins of the Catholic Church, which is a specific instance of a religion, do not tar religion as a whole. That's not how logic works. You have to show that A) sexual abuse of children is common in a significant portion of religious organizations, and B) that it's actually due to the religious part of the term 'religious organization' and not the organization part of the term. And I think you'd have a hell of a time making that case, since there are plenty of other organizations that also have issues with sexual abuse of children. Namely, any organization in which adults have regular, privileged access to children. For instance, US Gymnastics, Boy Scouts, Penn State Football, etc. And religions are not the only human affinity groups responsible for other atrocities. Ethnicities have lead to genocide on several occasions. And so have political ideologies.
    - dorian-graph 7y ago
      Has mass genocide ever been committed in the name of something other than religion? Yup.
- eropple 7y ago
  Your second point is a fair one. Your first makes me scratch my head. Sure, maybe few organizations by number, but you might've noticed that the Western world is dealing with the resurgence of some real odious ideological movements (which, interestingly enough, mirror religious movements elsewhere in tactics and in epistemic closure) whose primary mode of attraction is providing some measure of belonging for people who don't, or feel like they don't, in the main. I'm not religious, I'm not a fan of organized religion as a thing, at least in the modern era--'toasterlovin makes good points about the historical and even current positives of such organizations, I'm not convinced they balance out to a net positive today but I'm much more willing to consider the notion historically. But there are nastier partners on the dance card right now and this kinda minimizes that.
  - toasterlovin 7y ago
    > 'toasterlovin makes good points about the historical and even current positives of such organizations, I'm not convinced they balance out to a net positive today but I'm much more willing to consider the notion historically Huh, my intuition is the opposite: now that organized religions have been defanged and stripped of most of their political power they are probably more of a net positive force today than they ever were in the past.
    - eropple 7y ago
      Perhaps that's true outside of the United States and I'm showing my biases. Here, the religious-reactionary complex has been a prime mover to get us where we are today.
      - Apocryphon 7y ago
        It feels like the evangelical movement’s power on the wane, and the subcultures gaining ground on that side of the political spectrum are less savory...
        eropple 7y ago
- toasterlovin 7y ago
  FWIW, I disagree with your post being flagged. While I disagree with you and think your position lacks internal consistency, it’s a common position and you’ve shown a willingness to argue in good faith, which I appreciate. So I’m sorry to see this flagged. See you around.

1. Few human organisations nowadays promote values as bad as most religions. 2. You can be a member of several overlapping organizations, but only one church, normally. So, the problem of losing a community is exacerbated with church.

toasterlovin 7y ago
> 1. Few human organisations nowadays promote values as bad as most religions. It sounds like your mind is inhabited by a caricature of religion, rather than a realistic conception of the thing. For instance, our neighborhood church uses their facilities to provide (secular) services to the local community. They also organize a monthly service day where community members (not just their congregation) provide help to people in need. Many other churches do similar things. And there is a reason why so many hospitals in the U.S. have religious names: they were started by churches. If you want to hold religion to account for the bad that they contribute, you also have to give them credit for the good. And I think once you start doing that, you'll find that it's all pretty much a wash.
- UI_at_80x24 7y ago
  >If you want to hold religion to account for the bad that they contribute, you also have to give them credit for the good. And I think once you start doing that, you'll find that it's all pretty much a wash. Bullshit Commit mass genocide? That's ok look at these shiny new automobiles. The continued rape of HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of children? That's ok, we taught them math. You probably blame women for getting raped (What was she wearing? Why was she out alone at night?) instead of blaming men for raping. Until all of these institutions are brought down and eradicated the "damaging good" will continue.
  - toasterlovin 7y ago
    Look, I'm the last person to make excuses for the Catholic Church (I'm guessing that's what you were referring to), but the sins of the Catholic Church, which is a specific instance of a religion, do not tar religion as a whole. That's not how logic works. You have to show that A) sexual abuse of children is common in a significant portion of religious organizations, and B) that it's actually due to the religious part of the term 'religious organization' and not the organization part of the term. And I think you'd have a hell of a time making that case, since there are plenty of other organizations that also have issues with sexual abuse of children. Namely, any organization in which adults have regular, privileged access to children. For instance, US Gymnastics, Boy Scouts, Penn State Football, etc. And religions are not the only human affinity groups responsible for other atrocities. Ethnicities have lead to genocide on several occasions. And so have political ideologies.
  - dorian-graph 7y ago
    Has mass genocide ever been committed in the name of something other than religion? Yup.
eropple 7y ago
Your second point is a fair one. Your first makes me scratch my head. Sure, maybe few organizations by number, but you might've noticed that the Western world is dealing with the resurgence of some real odious ideological movements (which, interestingly enough, mirror religious movements elsewhere in tactics and in epistemic closure) whose primary mode of attraction is providing some measure of belonging for people who don't, or feel like they don't, in the main. I'm not religious, I'm not a fan of organized religion as a thing, at least in the modern era--'toasterlovin makes good points about the historical and even current positives of such organizations, I'm not convinced they balance out to a net positive today but I'm much more willing to consider the notion historically. But there are nastier partners on the dance card right now and this kinda minimizes that.
- toasterlovin 7y ago
  > 'toasterlovin makes good points about the historical and even current positives of such organizations, I'm not convinced they balance out to a net positive today but I'm much more willing to consider the notion historically Huh, my intuition is the opposite: now that organized religions have been defanged and stripped of most of their political power they are probably more of a net positive force today than they ever were in the past.
  - eropple 7y ago
    Perhaps that's true outside of the United States and I'm showing my biases. Here, the religious-reactionary complex has been a prime mover to get us where we are today.
    - Apocryphon 7y ago
      It feels like the evangelical movement’s power on the wane, and the subcultures gaining ground on that side of the political spectrum are less savory...
      - eropple 7y ago
toasterlovin 7y ago
FWIW, I disagree with your post being flagged. While I disagree with you and think your position lacks internal consistency, it’s a common position and you’ve shown a willingness to argue in good faith, which I appreciate. So I’m sorry to see this flagged. See you around.