Another reason why religion bothers me

[VeganDrew]

I don't mind religion at all as long as it causes people to behave completely in line with my secular, logic-pursuant ideals in every way, shape, and form that affects others.

 

A friend of mine is a vegan and AR activist who is also concerned about global justice, human rights, etc and plans on devoting much of her life to those goals. She comes to these conclusions while maintaining a sort of buddhist/christian religious belief. While I believe religion is ridiculous, she can worship rocks as far as her behavior is concerned if she's still behaving in ways I consider ethical.

[DaN]

Bear in mind, most religions came out of peoples needs for explanations of things, and at the time, the explanations given were based on as much information as they could get.Science these days does EXACTLY the same.It attempts to explain things based on as much information as it can get.Science has the advantage of technology, and history to get more information to base its explanations on.In this manner, it is generally more accurate an explanation of things.All religion was, in its purest form, is an attempt to explain things.All science is, in its purist form, is an attempt to explain things.

 

My point is that they have the same root.

 

The problem occurs when religion or science attempt to be more than what they are.Science should accept that it does not yet have the tools to answer questions people have about god - so why feel like they have a right to say, "no god isnt real" This is above sciences station I'm afraid.It can however answer questions people have about wind, or gravity, really well.And religions need to accept that they are wrong in alot of their basic teachings too, like how humans were created.I am afraid science has the tools to explain that, at the least explain it better than the whole Adam and Eve nonsense.They cling onto beliefs that made sense at the time, but do not anymore.Science, generally abandons its mistakes, where religion does not.Nearly all religions fall into this trap, and as such, are ultimately doomed to failure.They are a few dynamic religions which are more addept at coping with change, like science does.Buddhism is one of these.It is a terrible thing when people dump Buddhism in the same category as Christianity, which is one of the most idiotic religions around.Dont get me wrong I am not against all Christianity, by no means.Some things are good, like the moral teachings, and lessons of humility & compassion.You will not find these lessons in a science journal.However there is alot of crap in the Christain religion.Their total intolerance of other religions, and also those who do not have a religion is very immature.The fact that they call all other religions and non-believers "sinners" is again, immature, and at worst, a sin (oh the irony) You could almost accept their claim to righteousness over all the rest of us if their track record was perfect, if every act made by the christain movement had been positive and faultless.But this is far from the case.How many wars have occured because of the christian religions beliefs and intolerances? Compare this to Ghandis movement, or Buddhism, and you can see the problem with christians calling buddhism, an evil pagan worship.

 

The problem is, the religions of Christianity & Muslims have taken the main role in what people regard as religions, and the truth is they are bad representatives.As an example, neither of them encourage vegetarianism.Infact they both attempt to justify meat eating with crap stories about how "god" said animals were here for our use.The reality is that the "god" who wrote these passages was actually some hairy man in a cave somewhere who liked a nice lamb roast.

 

I am attracted to religions that align themselves with veganism, like Buddhism, because if they are right about that, it indicates they have intelligence and compassion.They thought about the same things we did when we decided to be vegan.The main tenet of Buddhism is "ahisma" which means harmlessness to others.That is exactly what we all live our lives by.In that sense we are related.The other belief of Buddhism is that a man called Siddharta Gautama reached enlightenment, and that we can all do the same.Siddharta is a verifiable historical character, and his teachings were definately written by him, during his life.These teachings will improve anyones life, and are a real valuable piece of our heritage.You wont find that kind of teaching in a science journal either.But you will find lots of research and test results that were arrived at through the use of animal testing.That is the irony of vegans who so closely follow science, but who would laugh at Buddhism.Of course things that are discovered without the torture of animals, I am totally in respect of.

 

My overall point is, you cant expect any one thing to give you all the answers.The problems of our world are caused by people who are stuck in boxes, stuck in groups that fight eachother, stuck with brains that think within the confines of just science, or christianity, and unable to openly deal with theories that their books do not cover.The Catholics will run to their book and see what it says about condoms, and decide based on that.When confronted by a belief like past lives, the scientist will run to his book and see what it says about that, and decide based on that.Its a shame that such limited thought rules our planet.

 

Outside of the boxes and factions, its possible to freely express thought without boundaries.By doing that, it is possible to be truly free.

[Guest]

Interesting post DaN. I agree with alot of what you said, eventhough you sound biased against certain religions which is fine.

[blabbate]

Interesting post DaN. I agree with alot of what you said, eventhough you sound biased against certain religions which is fine.

It's much more efficient to be biased against all of them indiscriminately.

[DaN]

Thanks for your reply 4X4

 

I guess I am biased towards certain religions, but not because of some pre-disposition.I grew up in a christian family, and have read the bible fully (unlike alot of people who still feel qualified to comment on the book, or religion)

 

I just looked at all the religions, from a historical and moral viewpoint, with no bias.Unfortunately, christianity and most other religions of the region fall short of the mark, in my opinion.I base this on the events in history they have been involved in, and the moral guidlines they set out.I find it interesting as a note that the first of the ten commandments, apparently given to Moses by God himself, is 'thou shalt not kill' And yet every christian I know apart from the vege ones kill on a weekly basis to feed their meat eating habits.I find very few religions that mention the rights of animals to life.That is where buddhism steps in, and it is very clear on the subject.Unlike christians, muslims and jews, buddhists have rarely if at all been involed in any war other than as victims, like in Tibet.

 

On a side note it is interesting to note that Indian religions express a deep respect for animals, and a huge number of vegetarians exist in India:

 

The most concentrated population of vegetarians (and vegans) is in

India, where many avoid meat of religious reasons. However, because of

the nature of statistical information about India, it is not clear how

many really avoid meat, and how many do that out of principle

(religious or ideological) reasons, as opposed to those who cannot

afford meat. Because of the religious nature of vegetarianism, it is

also possible that people ?beautify? their answers at polls, and

occasional meat-eaters claim to be vegetarians. Most Indian

vegetarians are lacto-vegetarians (who drink milk but avoid eggs), and

this counts, according to U.S. Dept. of Agriculture data, to 20-30% of

the population. Large parts of the remaining 70% are only occasional

meat-eaters, and don?t eat animal products regularly

 

The priesthood of most ancient religions including ancient Egypt which was the dominant world power for around 2500 years were encouraged to abstain from meat completely.

 

While I have little faith in modern religions, my opinion changes on religions further back in time, which show a deeper understanding of truth & knowledge.An interesting group of books are the Toltec wisdom books by Don Miguel Ruiz, which show a level of morality and sense far beyond anything in modern religions, or indeed science or popular culture.

 

[blabbate]

I just looked at all the religions, from a historical and moral viewpoint, with no bias.Unfortunately, christianity and most other religions of the region fall short of the mark, in my opinion.I base this on the events in history they have been involved in, and the moral guidlines they set out.I find it interesting as a note that the first of the ten commandments, apparently given to Moses by God himself, is 'thou shalt not kill'

Actually, whether you look in Exodus or Deuteronomy, the first commandment is always, "Have no other gods before me." (Exodus 20:3, Deut 5:7) Ego first, then everything else. Killing is 5th or 6th, depending on chapter and interpretation.

[Guest]

Unlike christians, muslims and jews, buddhists have rarely if at all been involed in any war other than as victims, like in Tibet.

You forgot about CIA trained and funded Tibetian commandos who fought against Chinese military occupation during the 1950's.

[blabbate]

Unlike christians, muslims and jews, buddhists have rarely if at all been involed in any war other than as victims, like in Tibet.

You forgot about CIA trained and funded Tibetian commandos who fought against Chinese military occupation during the 1950's.

He did allow for "rarely," and I think the point is solid. Buddhist violence is a rare exception. Abrahamic violence has too often been the rule.

[Guest]

Unlike christians, muslims and jews, buddhists have rarely if at all been involed in any war other than as victims, like in Tibet.

You forgot about CIA trained and funded Tibetian commandos who fought against Chinese military occupation during the 1950's.

He did allow for "rarely," and I think the point is solid. Buddhist violence is a rare exception. Abrahamic violence has too often been the rule.

There were victims in Tibet before the Chinese invasion and occupation. The fuedual landlords religious hiearchy's serfs.

 

I'm sick of the lie that Tibet was a utopian paradise before the commies invaded.

 

Friendly Feudalism: The Tibet Myth

http://www.michaelparenti.org/Tibet.html

[DaN]

Blabbate, I think you are right on the thou shalt not kill being 5th or 6th.I didnt actually mean to write first, lol! It was a long post overall and it was hot here.I blame lack of calorific intake also

 

4X4 I didnt forget about the tibetan commando's, and I never siad Tibet was a peaceful utopia.I think you will find that by the time of the commando's the threat to Tibet was severely underway.It was self defense on the part of the Tibetans, and political reasons on the US's part.

 

Most of the problems with Feudalism in Tibet, and other Feudalist countries in history has come from the political feudal leaders, not the religion or priests.Infact the priests generally, were against military action because of their religious beliefs and their understanding of killing being wrong.In ghandis case he didnt even react violently when his life was threatened.This strength of conviction comes from a strong mature religion like Buddhism.

 

Unfortunately, a large number of wars where christianity has been involved have been started not by politics, and opposed by the priests, like in Tibet.The religious leaders actually instigated the wars, sometimes, even against the political powers wishes - the complete opposite.This actually continues today as it did in the times of the crusades, against the muslim world.That is because christianity on the whole advocates any war against rival religions - as do most other religions.This is why the cycle will never stop, and I'm afraid christianity lowers itself by being involved.

 

Please dont be offended by me, or my points.It is not my intention to criticise you or christianity.I am using christianity as an example of a modern religion.I could just as easily have this conversation by swapping 'christianity' with 'Islam'

 

I would however struggle to replace it with Buddhism, and for that reason, among others I regard it as a clever, humane and superior belief structure.I have read Buddhist scriptures too, and found them personally more useful in my daily activity, than i do some of the things in the bible.Not 'coveting my neighbours ass' has limited uses for me at present

 

As I said, please dont take this as an attack, I am simply ponting out the truth of history, and you know the truth takes no prisoners, it just is, what it is.

[Guest]

I think I overreacted because of my past experiences with people. I've met many people, Americans, who believe Tibet was a utopian place before the Chinese invasion and don't know about feudalism and CIA involvement in Tibet. My comment wasn't directed at you.

 

The Amish are peaceful.

[VeganEssentials]

The Amish are peaceful.

 

And they have the distinction of being the main profiteers of puppy mills in the USA, so while they may be "peaceful" in regard to human relations, they look at animals primarily as only of being a commodity. Sorry to get off-topic, but I had to throw that one in there.

[Guest]

The Amish are peaceful.

 

And they have the distinction of being the main profiteers of puppy mills in the USA, so while they may be "peaceful" in regard to human relations, they look at animals primarily as only of being a commodity. Sorry to get off-topic, but I had to throw that one in there.

No need to apologize. I never knew this fact. Thanks for the information.

[VeganDrew]

How about we oppose offensive violence regardless of which invisible people the offender thinks are real?

 

[xveganjoshx]

"God told me to skin you alive..." - Jello Biafra

[VeganEssentials]

No need to apologize. I never knew this fact. Thanks for the information.

 

No problem. It's not a well-known fact about the puppy mills (yet), but they've been moving from PA to Wisconsin in droves to the lesser-populated parts to escape the tightening restrictions on animal cruelty via puppy mills in other states. Despite being extremely liberal, our governor seems to think that this isn't an issue to take seriously (primarily because it brings a lot of revenue to the state). But, it's been getting plenty of attention here lately, so the heat's on!

[DaN]

Puppy mills?

 

What is this?

 

Like factory farmed puppies for sale?

[blabbate]

Puppy mills?

 

What is this?

 

Like factory farmed puppies for sale?

Got it in one. Imagine the conditions of your average, large-scale, agribusiness livestock operation, but with puppies.

[DaN]

Thats just wrong, & cruel.

 

We have them here in the UK too, although they arent called puppy mills.

 

People should only buy from smale scale, respectable breeders!

 

[VeganDrew]

That's sarcasm, right?

[Liberacion-Igualdad]

That's sarcasm, right?

 

My first thought: "Let's hope so."

 

My second thought: "Hope (like faith) is a dangerous thing."

[DaN]

I wrote:

Thats just wrong, & cruel.

 

We have them here in the UK too, although they arent called puppy mills.

 

People should only buy from smale scale, respectable breeders!

 

Drew wrote:

 

That's sarcasm, right?

 

What do you think I have written that is sarcasm?

 

>It is wrong and cruel to farm puppies.

>We do have that kind of thing in the UK but they are not called puppy mills.

>People should only buy from small scale respectable breeders.

 

......? Explain?

[xjohanx]

Since there are many shelter dogs in need of a home it would make more sense to take care of all of them before breeding new ones. The shelter dogs will be killed if they're not adopted.

 

This comercial is not completely accurate (duh) but it gives you the idea

 

[blabbate]

What do you think I have written that is sarcasm?

>People should only buy from small scale respectable breeders.

......? Explain?

That one. People shouldn't buy from breeders at all. We don't need breeders, even small-scale ones, as long as there are animals in shelters or on the streets.

[Liberacion-Igualdad]

The thing that bothers me the most about religions is their anthropocentrism/speciesism. As far as I know, this is common to all religions – I don’t know any exception.

 

From the ‘god created man [sic] in his image and animals [sic] for man to use’ type, to those who believe in reincarnation and always have the bipedal hominids on top of their ‘reincarnation ladder’, the common ground is that humans are always at the ‘highest’ of some kind of self-created pyramid.

 

And the extent to which some of these religious proposes some kind of ‘humane’ treatment of other animals (whatever that is) is always a matter of our charity or convenience, not of their rights. “Let’s not be cruel to the beasts. That doesn’t speak well of us” or “if you are cruel to ‘animals’ you might be cruel to humans” or “let’s not be cruel to ‘animals’, or we might just end up being one of them in our next life… and we don’t want that!”

 

As a vegan, I think this is extremely dangerous, and it’s the reason why I think religions aren’t just some pile of nice, yet false, stories about our past. When not the primary motor, religions have always been there to catalyze and justify injustice imposed on other animals, women, children, humans of other ethnicities or sexual orientation, etc.

 

Some say that there are some ‘good things’ about religion. Well, there might be. There might be ‘good things’ about everything. Think about it. Think about the most hideous ideology you can remember, and I bet you can find good things about it.

But that doesn’t make them all desirable, nor does it make the ‘bad things’ about them go away.

 

Now, many of these ‘good things’ most humans mention, aren’t really that good. Let’s take the ‘thou shall not kill’ bit, of the judeo-christian tradition. I’ve heard many vegetarians and vegans trying to use this to make christians reconsider their relationship to other animals. But this thing wasn’t meant to encompass other animals. It wasn’t even meant to be about all humans. It was only for jews in regards to other jews. “Jews shall not kill jews”. After all, are we to believe that god simply had a bad day when he told ‘his people’ to go and kill entire populations of non-jews? Or when ‘he’ commanded the murder of other animals for ‘his’ pleasure?

 

*Just as a reminder, an omniscient god cannot change its mind! *

 

So besides the question of whether what religions say is true or not, we should also ask ourselves whether religions or other supernatural beliefs are desirable elements in a healthy society, based on their history and foundations, and not on nit-picking the parts we like about them the most.