After Constantine had advised that it was wiser for Christians not to be taught in the Greek traditions it was all but over for Christian education and all but ready for Christian ignorance. The thought that a system of values, that regards ignorance as its highest achievement is a template for a universal moral code is breathtaking. Christians simply can’t reason without reference to dogma, making their conclusions all but worthless in liberal democracies. The thought that a witch doctor’s advice was an essential part of a 21st century Indian reservation’s ethical logo would be laughed at in the halls of power. Yet when it comes to their own discredited witch-doctors ideas they have no problem beholding the advice as the epitome of wisdom.
Far from appearing an ethically superior worldview, Christianity’s obsession with sexual activities and other people’s life-choices gives it the look of a perverted washed up mind-set, totally out of touch with a civilisation that’s increasingly oblivious to its message. Having no recourse to moral consequences religious thinking is full of warnings and taboos yet bereft of the moral conscience needed to make ethical judgments; the idea that the church has a contribution to make to the moral debate is a joke.
Moral command ethics chains the human evaluation of the church to a population of licensees, allowed, but not free, to act according to their conscience. If people’s lawful idiosyncratic preferences differ from a handful of prescribed dogmas, there deemed ‘’theologically’’ unlawful, and worthy of punishments society wouldn’t feel justified in administering to a mass murderer.
With shattering world events like the Asian tsunami seemingly insignificant when compared to gay marriage, or masturbation, and contraception considered more dangerous than the aids virus, the idea of moral law is a dead duck. Such deranged values can never even masquerade as an ethical worldview.
In reality the problem lies with trying to impose a system of archaic judgmental restrictions on law abiding citizens who simply have no interest in them. Christian ethics is two thousand years out of date.
I advise that sin is the most ethically pure life-style available.
Why sympathise with hypocrits? I was raised by such people; they believed themselves to be moral and better than anyone else and they never understood the damage they did to their children. I remember their talks against any personal freedom, abortion and contraception - the horrible women clad in persianer furcoats. Don't ask how that fur is made...
Christians cannot reason without reference to dogma. A slight re-work on your words there and very true. I'm always being asked which philosophical system or "teacher" that I follow. The very question shows that a theist is doing the asking and that their narrow views do not agree with mine. I don't care about Socrates or Plato, or about "teachers" of logic. If a person can reason without dogma entering in he can be true to science and himself. The absurdity that we are following someone for our logic and morals is extreme ignorance at its best. Time for a new model.
Recently I discovered the Genesis Science Channel. Not surprisingly they are using the ideas in Genesis to try and counter evolution. With not much real science here, they go round and round and round. Their best science idea is that nothing has been observed in the lab on evolution. They seem too dumb to understand that if evolution was declared wrong tomorrow it doesn't mean that "god did it." Christian answers are so very cut and dried. Everything is yes or no. I find that strange because we live in an era where nobody will admit what the evidence shows on anything. Racists, murderers, and even murdering cops claim they "didn't do it" when the evidence has been filmed. In every situation what you just saw did not happen and yet, they want you to believe religious bullshit!
Religion and ethics just do not mix, so once again it's time for a new model.
Didn't you know, gay sex and masturbation causes tsunamis? So of course they are more important moral dilemmas. :-D~
Correctly said, Bertold. Somehow to this day the church world wants to politely think Onan was a jackoff. Apparently John Kellogg believed it and around that time we had doctors into circumcising the male to prevent masturbation. They pushed ideas of cleanliness but this medical butchery was supposed to cure masturbation and acne. We were appalled as a nation that our children might play with themselves.
I got a lot of laughs one day and didn't know exactly why. Too young I guess. My cousin was inside the house and I wanted her to come out and play. She didn't want to. In front of several adults I announced that if she didn't come out to play I was "going to go play with myself." Years later I finally got it.
What with this Kim woman and the Pope decreeing all sorts of solutions to non existent problems, I get the impression of a kind of computer virus with clothes on.
As you say Bert their probably racking their theological brains to bring it all out of a demonic Noddy land and into reality. Without going blind!
Let's be quite honest about it, if someone doesn't enjoy masturbation they have a problem with their loins not their principles.
True Bertold, Onan simply refused to give his brother's wife a child. That had nothing to do with masturbation. His seed fell to the ground instead of in her when he withdrew.
Thus sparking the Catholic song: "Every Sperm Is Sacred" by Monty Python.
Another example of questionable Christian ethics: (via Friendly Atheist)
A Baptist-funded charity in Oklahoma just rejected a donation once they learned it was given on behalf of an atheist group. "It makes you wonder what, exactly, they think goes “against everything they believe in.” What are they opposed to? The notion that atheists can also be kind and generous?"
(A conservative Christian blogger writes that Christians' entire lives, including charitable deeds, should have the goal of spreading their gospel, of showing how wonderful their god is [as if the charities would even be needed!], and that's incompatible with participation by atheists simply "giving back" to the community because it's a right thing to do.)
The donors, Matt and Keli Wilbourn, offered more money, and were refused again. So they started a GoFundMe page.
"Let’s hope the Murrow Indian Children’s Home accepts whatever money is raised.
If they don’t, though, Matt said any money raised will go to Camp Quest."
Hemant Mehta updated his second Friendly Atheist article on the story: "Matt tells me he’s giving the charity until 7:00p tonight to accept the money or Camp Quest will get all of it."
In an update on their GoFundMe page, Matt and Keli write that they'll give $5000 of the money to the Indian Children's Home anonymously, either directly or through one of the churches that have been supportive. The rest will go to Camp Quest.
They really are taking the high road here!