Steve said to Gav and dmb: Let me attempt to make a comparison here. Would this also feel like U.S. government-for-freedoms? The U.S. government, like the Catholic church, is a social organization. The U.S. government promotes fundamental freedoms, despite at various points in its history denying those freedoms (Trail of Tears, Japanese internment during WWII, waterboarding, etc...). So is the U.S. government hypocritical or not?
dmb says: Yep, no doubt about it. The U.S. government has been hypocritical with respect to its own ideals. And more often than not, those cases of hypocrisy were justified on religious grounds. The founders knew this and said as much right from the start. (With respect to slavery.) There is even a connection between the current illegal and immoral war (as well as the torture being used) and Bush's belief that God chose him and Bush's belief that our freedom is was granted by God. We don't have to go back to the middle ages to find a case where leaders think their torture is justified by God or that it is a legitimate part of the battle against "evil". It is still happening even as we speak. Ironically, Jesus Christ was tortured to death. One might suppose that torture would be strictly prohibited by any religion that grew out of that event, but no. Steve continued: Most of the Catholic church's atrocities occurred during the Middle Ages, when the church was a political power (they owned most of the land). Now, the church has almost zero political power. My point here is, I would not judge a social structure based on its track record, because the responsibility lies with the people inside those structures. dmb says: You've certainly made a valid point here. But one of the sayings loved and defended by both Catholics and pragmatists is, "by their fruits you shall know them". And you must be aware of the very recent epidemic of child rape by Catholic priests. I'd certainly call that an atrocity, one that depends on an abuse of power. Let me try a different approach. A friend of mine was a therapist of sorts for 15 years. She helped people with all sorts of problems with a combination of psychotherapy and art. She told me that nuns and priests were among the patients she treated. Interestingly, they suffered from the same problem. They had no identity, no personality. They had no idea who they really were or what they wanted out of life. Some part of themselves had failed to grow or develop because of their occupation. Apparently, the church did not save their souls, it stunted their souls. I realize that some people are so far gone that a church can literally save their lives, but I walked away from that conversation convinced that, very often, religion is bad for you. It injures and retards and shames people. Maybe this helps to explain the current epidemic of molestation. I mean, its clear that there are quite a number of very sick people working in the church. One could even make a case that such perso ns are criminally insane. As I see it, a healthy religious organization is one that promotes growth, fosters enlightenment experiences and it would be intellectually respectable too. If there's a church in the West that had all that, it would be news to me. Let me anticipate your next move. Yes, of course it is a good thing to feed the hungry and house the homeless and I realize that many religious people are involved in doing those good things. I'd point out that an atheist can do those good things just as well. That sort of decency doesn't have any necessary connection to religion. _________________________________________________________________ Stay in touch when you're away with Windows Live Messenger. http://www.windowslive.com/messenger/overview.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_messenger2_072008 Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
