Thoughts on Religion and the State

[zagibu]

I like that ladder allegory. Also, I have to agree, the new pope is quite exceptional for a pope.

[BlindGuy]

I also recomend anyone who wants to know about what real socialism is to read "The Road to Wigan Pier" by George Orwell. A man who wanted people not to be used, not to be hungry, not be to bled for the bread of others. It is a very good primer on understanding the difference between true socialism and the horrible fascist states that are set up in its name.

If that is too heavy going for you, try "Animal Farm". This is obviously a very popular book about the russian revolution and the rise of Stalin. It is often given to children to read, but unlike Harry Potter I do not think it is any way a children's book. I weep inside for Boxer... but unfortunatly I am Benjamin it seems. At least I hope so. Maybe I am the cat: Who are you? respond pls if you have read it.

[Kafein]

As far as I know, we don't punish lying in bed with your neighbour's wife by... stoning the wife. We don't punish it legally at all actually, except if you count divorce lawsuits.

Also, the Bible itself but even its depiction of Jesus is full of inconsistencies and seemingly incoherent behavior. Sometimes Jesus is a hippie, sometimes he's a morality navisitors can't see pics , please register or login
zi.

I also recomend anyone who wants to know about what real socialism is to read "The Road to Wigan Pier" by George Orwell. A man who wanted people not to be used, not to be hungry, not be to bled for the bread of others. It is a very good primer on understanding the difference between true socialism and the horrible fascist states that are set up in its name.

If that is too heavy going for you, try "Animal Farm". This is obviously a very popular book about the russian revolution and the rise of Stalin. It is often given to children to read, but unlike Harry Potter I do not think it is any way a children's book. I weep inside for Boxer... but unfortunatly I am Benjamin it seems. At least I hope so. Maybe I am the cat: Who are you? respond pls if you have read it.

I will definitely read Orwell at some yet undefined point in the future, but right now i am not your man.


Everybody slightly informed knows the current Pope is a full socialist, in the first sense. The first sense of socialism being "communism through non-violent means", that is, no market economy.

Just like every other socialist, he is also dead wrong that socialism would be a solution to poverty. Greed and selfishness are natural and widespread, because being selfish is oftentimes an evolutionary advantage and has been forever. Capitalism uses greed to work. Communism uses altruism to work, even though societies applying both systems profit from altruism anyway. Communism cannot withstand greed while capitalism can because it is basically built around that critical failure of other economic systems.

Let us not forget that even though the actions of the catholic clergy in history almost never stood true to this, the Bible is fairly anti-capitalist. One of the versets I remember goes like "to keep food when others starve, to keep clothes when others freeze to death, is sin". Continuing on this, I'd say the Bible, like the whole body of Judeo-Christian ethics, is morally short-sighted. They call bad what is immediately and visibly bad, yet don't seem to apprehend the consequences of what they are wishing for.

[BlindGuy]

Well, the only time I remember Jesus using violence (read old and new testament LONG ago) was throwing the greedy shopkeepers from the temple.

[Eugen]

No, the values aren't reflected in modern law. Laws would be the same even if Christianity had never existed.

But Christianity did exist (and to some degree still does). And without its existence european history would be really different - also our laws. Without christianity we would not have had monastrys and monks who saved antique knowledge through the middle ages. We would have forgotten latin and old greek language. Monastrys were the centers of learning and study in the middle ages (those times before universitys for the public existed and peasants were not much more then owned cattle). The monks copied many books of old and saved that wisdom (and also changed some content to be more "christian"), so later generations could still learn from that. Thats exaclty what happened in Rennaisance. This would not have been possible without christian monks. Without church we would have some more "witches" around and maybe some more different pagan believes. And on and on and on. Without christianity we would not have the same written german language, which was highly popularised by Martin Luther and his bible - the first one in german language, so the peasants could learn and try to read it themselves...
and lot more of influence from christianity in Europe as dominant doctrine, that in some periods was brutaly enforced on the public by feudal and clerical law. Dont try to say our history does not influence our present with a single sentence statement, its just not true.

You could well say that other non christian people could have also fullfilled this role as sholars, counselors and shepards and moral judges of the people. But it was not other people. So we have over thousand years of history seen through mostly christian perspective. In many countries the biggest charity-organisations still are funded by church (Caritas).

Its just fact, that we have strong christian roots in Europe. The only question is: do we want to cut those roots out and neglect everything of the past or do we accept our history with all the bad and also the good things, that have been?

[Kafein]

But Christianity did exist (and to some degree still does). And without its existence world would be really different

Yeah, but had basically anything happen differently in the past, the world would be really different too.

[kinngrimm]

I said it is reflected.

...

cause and effect

While within scientific enclosed testing environments, you may clearly see what caused which effect and while physics tell us, that any action causes a reaction, that energy doesnt get lost but converted, so do the actions of human have effect onto each other, ripple effects going back and forth through our consiousnesses. To measure them maybe quite more complex. Earlier on it was mentioned and also confirmed that our brain from how neurons work within are at least partly chaotic, nethertheless, also there are rules imbeded. Now to make a philosophical stretch, you could say the same with morals supported and backed up by religions, as causes to have effect on human and their decession making processes, leading then to considerations on different levels of legislative and judiciary thought processes and argumentations.

F.e. when debates are drawn into focus on stemcell research, onto nano technology, onto atomic energy and other life altering or possibly majorly impacting technologies, the religious thinkers as also philosophs are an important part of the process, showing us concerns. It is for the argument, not important if those concerns are valid or not, fact stays they are part of the debate arguing with ethics and moral point of views and therefor base for laws which later are put in motion.

Neglecting this, is as shortsited for our own sakes i think, as any type of believe may be crippling through dogmas.

From that point of view i cant agree on "christianity or any religon wouldn't have had or will never again have impact on the creation of laws within societies", you may question if they should, but you cant deny that they do, even if only indirectly, whereby i would say quite directly in debats and the resulting laws.

[Eugen]

Yes Kafein. Thats kinda obvious. My point is, that christianity had a major influence on European history that can not be easily ignored. Further I like to define christian religion not only by its dogma and religious manifest but also by the different roles it has fulfilled in time. As I am not a student I only can relay on my general knowledge. So I may be wrong in many points. Still I think church was an important counterpart to worldy mights in the past and as is true for all history, we can learn from the past. Today I think we also lose a lot of "humanistic" education since school and university tend to concentrate on proffesional training. Still I think its as important to the education to learn about history, classical and modern art, literature, music and religion - witch is a kind of cultural education. And culture is something that makes human life rich and enjoyable. But maybe I am wrong and only money and success really matter.

To the topic: My opinion still stands: Religion should not have the power to make laws, but (hopefully democratic elected) lawgivers should grant religions a place in society.

[Xant]

But Christianity did exist (and to some degree still does). And without its existence european history would be really different - also our laws. Without christianity we would not have had monastrys and monks who saved antique knowledge through the middle ages. We would have forgotten latin and old greek language. Monastrys were the centers of learning and study in the middle ages (those times before universitys for the public existed and peasants were not much more then owned cattle). The monks copied many books of old and saved that wisdom (and also changed some content to be more "christian"), so later generations could still learn from that. Thats exaclty what happened in Rennaisance. This would not have been possible without christian monks. Without church we would have some more "witches" around and maybe some more different pagan believes. And on and on and on. Without christianity we would not have the same written german language, which was highly popularised by Martin Luther and his bible - the first one in german language, so the peasants could learn and try to read it themselves...
and lot more of influence from christianity in Europe as dominant doctrine, that in some periods was brutaly enforced on the public by feudal and clerical law. Dont try to say our history does not influence our present with a single sentence statement, its just not true.

You could well say that other non christian people could have also fullfilled this role as sholars, counselors and shepards and moral judges of the people. But it was not other people. So we have over thousand years of history seen through mostly christian perspective. In many countries the biggest charity-organisations still are funded by church (Caritas).

Its just fact, that we have strong christian roots in Europe. The only question is: do we want to cut those roots out and neglect everything of the past or do we accept our history with all the bad and also the good things, that have been?

Pure speculation which also happens to have nothing to do with what you quoted.

[Eugen]

@Xant: So you say. All "what if" thoughts are speculation. Still I made some valid points about the function and importance of monastries, priests and church in general in the european middle ages and how that might affect our life today.

I dont want to discuss if any special laws are more or less christian than others. I wanted to hint at the fact that parts of our writing and thinking are influenced by our history and especially in Europe Christianity had a strong part in that. Further I think that its not unimportant to think about religion, what it is good for, why we have it and what to do with it. Espcially in materialistic times like ours. If you want to further discuss if laws against murder are christian or just plain sane human judgement, just do.

[Kafein]

First things first, a huge part of the laws that we find necessary today do not come from christian, but from universal values shared by all humanity. Christian values influenced Europe in both good and bad ways. For example, the obsession of Catholicism with self-inflicted punishment and hardships stifled the economy.

If anything, today's Europe was more shaped by a rejection of religion (and therefore, Christianism), than by religion itself. We are afaik the most atheistic continent, even though we previously had religious pressure rarely seen elsewhere.

[TurmoilTom]

First things first, a huge part of the laws that we find necessary today do not come from christian, but from universal values shared by all humanity.

Christians refer to those "universal values" as Natural Law.  The idea is that all humans are born with an innate understanding of good and evil inherited from Adam and Eve after they ate the forbidden fruit in the Garden of Eden.  Whether they choose to follow good or evil based on that understanding is based upon their own free will, however.

[Kafein]

Christians refer to those "universal values" as Natural Law.  The idea is that all humans are born with an innate understanding of good and evil inherited from Adam and Eve after they ate the forbidden fruit in the Garden of Eden.  Whether they choose to follow good or evil based on that understanding is based upon their own free will, however.

Yeah, and I refer to ethics as a natural phenomenon that appeared because it is an evolutionary advantage. All cultures have myths that explain such things.

[TurmoilTom]

Yeah, and I refer to ethics as a natural phenomenon that appeared because it is an evolutionary advantage. All cultures have myths that explain such things.

Evolution is just another myth of another culture, though.  The only difference is that evolution is a more modern myth.  We'll never know for sure how morality and ethics came about because they weren't documented as they occurred.

[kinngrimm]

... We'll never know for sure how morality and ethics came about because they weren't documented as they occurred.

How about deduction from anthropological findings?