4 ms·

I'd love to see people stand up to Big Religion, but... how? Religion is institutionalized mental and physical child abuse and everybody seems a-okay with all

by seiji 13y ago

I'd love to see people stand up to Big Religion, but... how? Religion is institutionalized mental and physical child abuse and everybody seems a-okay with all of it.

VLM 13y ago
An inaccurate claim at the end given the trend toward irreligion in the united states. The wikipedia article of the same title is a pretty good summary.
ars 13y ago
> everybody seems a-okay with all of it. Because it's not abuse. Since when did it become socially acceptable to be bigoted in public? If you want to be intolerant at least keep your nastiness to yourself.
- derleth 13y ago
  So telling little gay kids that they were born broken and are going to Hell isn't abuse? Don't you dare say that it doesn't happen or that it doesn't matter. Don't you dare.
  - drdeca 13y ago
    To me it seems like calling that the fault of "religion" seems roughly analogous to blaming the concept of "government" for the actions of a specific city or state/province government? (that is, either 1 or 2 levels below a national government , though I might have made a mistake with the analogy there) Not all religions/versions of a religion are the same. I acknowledge that an analogy is not always a particularly strong argument, but it was the first responce I thought of, and it seemed an acceptable responce to me. Also, it might have made more sense to respond a few levels up, not sure what would have made the most sense to reply to.
    - derleth 13y ago
      It isn't a bad analogy. My counterargument is that local government policy can usually be changed a lot more easily than religious dogma, especially dogma surrounding who to demonize. Maintaining a strong notion of who is in the in-group and who is in the out-group seems to be an important mechanism in maintaining tribal cohesion. My point is that religions seem prone to demonizing people as a quick and easy way to define themselves and maintain cohesion. Look at all the really nasty doctrinal splits through history.
- harshreality 13y ago
  Religions that appeal to and demand fealty to a false/unverifiable authority or concept as the truth, rather than encouraging rational discussion and criticism. Religions that push rules based on those appeals to authority into the political realm, and attempt to force others to live by them... Believers who seek to proselytize under the flag of a false/unverifiable authority (typically explicitly supernatural) to non-believers... Parents who pass down the mind-virus of such religions to poor defenseless children... Labeling criticism of any of those bigotry is a panicked attempt to invoke the strong cultural taboo against narrow-minded discrimination, but the criticism and discrimination against those is hardly narrow-minded.

by seiji 13y ago

I'd love to see people stand up to Big Religion, but... how? Religion is institutionalized mental and physical child abuse and everybody seems a-okay with all of it.

VLM 13y ago

An inaccurate claim at the end given the trend toward irreligion in the united states. The wikipedia article of the same title is a pretty good summary.

ars 13y ago

> everybody seems a-okay with all of it. Because it's not abuse. Since when did it become socially acceptable to be bigoted in public? If you want to be intolerant at least keep your nastiness to yourself.

derleth 13y ago
So telling little gay kids that they were born broken and are going to Hell isn't abuse? Don't you dare say that it doesn't happen or that it doesn't matter. Don't you dare.
- drdeca 13y ago
  To me it seems like calling that the fault of "religion" seems roughly analogous to blaming the concept of "government" for the actions of a specific city or state/province government? (that is, either 1 or 2 levels below a national government , though I might have made a mistake with the analogy there) Not all religions/versions of a religion are the same. I acknowledge that an analogy is not always a particularly strong argument, but it was the first responce I thought of, and it seemed an acceptable responce to me. Also, it might have made more sense to respond a few levels up, not sure what would have made the most sense to reply to.
  - derleth 13y ago
    It isn't a bad analogy. My counterargument is that local government policy can usually be changed a lot more easily than religious dogma, especially dogma surrounding who to demonize. Maintaining a strong notion of who is in the in-group and who is in the out-group seems to be an important mechanism in maintaining tribal cohesion. My point is that religions seem prone to demonizing people as a quick and easy way to define themselves and maintain cohesion. Look at all the really nasty doctrinal splits through history.
harshreality 13y ago
Religions that appeal to and demand fealty to a false/unverifiable authority or concept as the truth, rather than encouraging rational discussion and criticism. Religions that push rules based on those appeals to authority into the political realm, and attempt to force others to live by them... Believers who seek to proselytize under the flag of a false/unverifiable authority (typically explicitly supernatural) to non-believers... Parents who pass down the mind-virus of such religions to poor defenseless children... Labeling criticism of any of those bigotry is a panicked attempt to invoke the strong cultural taboo against narrow-minded discrimination, but the criticism and discrimination against those is hardly narrow-minded.