Post by omera on Mar 28, 2013 19:45:25 GMT -6
God may or may not exist. If god doesn't exist, than its clear that the universe has no rules,
no commandments, no creed, no standard of behaviour, and so we're permitted to do as we please,
so long as we may do it.
If, on the other hand, god does exist- he's shown nothing but the capability to be
indifferent, or outright evil. In fact, it would seem, to the common man, if he examined -his
own- 'laws of god', God wants him to commit evil in his name. From a more world-wide
perspective, gods tendrils of power root their way into every faith, and so they are played
against each other. The suffering which results would feed this god, who has no regard for what
he promises, or the contradictory things which he says are the standard of behaviour.
If one religion is driven to extinction through His will, oh well. Theres a hundred more
to replace the ten previous once they've been wiped clean off the Earth.
Atheists can be 'good people'. Christians can be 'good people'. Satanists can be 'good
people'. Muslims can be 'good people'. To the tolerant, but ignorant mind, all religions are
capable of being 'good people'.
Again, a generalization has been made, and an assumption has made an ass of us all.
There are some who are honest- there are some who are willing to admit insanity, if only in the
name of fear. There are those who have no desire for good, and there are those who have no
reason, or emotional attachment to the idea of brotherly charity, peace, love, or unity. There
are people that are psychotic. There are people that are evil. There are people whose hatred is
the focal point of their lives. There are people who only want to bring destruction.
In the context of 'good', when such ideas as genocide are 'evil', when we must, as a
species, work towards loving our brother, towards unity, towards peace, what must be done to
those who would never allow it? Do we violate our own creed, and go out to annhilate these
particular individuals from the gene pool? Do we wait for them to commit evil, again realizing
that the goal of complete peace and unity was never achieved, and than throw them in prison?
Our emotions cloud our judgement, and while I will agree that properly attuned, our
emotions act as a form of deduction that works beyond the bounds of our logical intellect.
Sadly, most of us have the emotions of children; they can't grasp things which would shatter
their worldview. They can see a plain, necessary evil of truth in their view, but they can't
ever admit that it is indeed a truth. They will react with their emotions, rather than the logic
which has so coldly stated the necessary action which by most, is considered 'evil'.
When the world's population has exceeded a reasonable number; when everybody is starving
'in equality' because there are too many of us; when the skies are brown with smoke, and the
Earth, are nurturing but barbaric and savage mother, is in her death throes; when life itself
has decreased in quality, merely to increase its quantity; when suffering is unavoidable for
everybody because the majority won't say "Fuck it." and commit suicide. What will you say? Will
you continue to give your food to starving savages in run-down shacks? Will you continue to
support the 'loving' hand of the priest on your shoulder who tells you to sacrifice -your own
lifeblood- for your fellow man, who in return may have done something for somebody else, but not
-you-?
The philosophy of peace leaves nothing open to question, so long as its all fun and
games and nobody gets hurt. But whats the result of every philosophy of peace? What was the
result of confucianism? Confucianism was a prototype to communism. What was the result of
Christianity? The crusades. What was the result of Buddhism, the most peaceful, pacifist
religion in the world? They still. Fought. Wars (and quite recently Japan spent a long time
tearing itself apart in civil wars on themselves; the supposed religion of peace held dominion
over a country, which somehow, instead of killing their enemy kingdoms, decided it was better to
butcher their own).
And finally, its not the common man which starts these wars, but the collective of
political decision, which often is based on the necessary severity of a situation for one's own
people, and at other times based on greed and excess. Religion plays no role in politics, unless
its used solely to secure power over the people through their own faith.
no commandments, no creed, no standard of behaviour, and so we're permitted to do as we please,
so long as we may do it.
If, on the other hand, god does exist- he's shown nothing but the capability to be
indifferent, or outright evil. In fact, it would seem, to the common man, if he examined -his
own- 'laws of god', God wants him to commit evil in his name. From a more world-wide
perspective, gods tendrils of power root their way into every faith, and so they are played
against each other. The suffering which results would feed this god, who has no regard for what
he promises, or the contradictory things which he says are the standard of behaviour.
If one religion is driven to extinction through His will, oh well. Theres a hundred more
to replace the ten previous once they've been wiped clean off the Earth.
Atheists can be 'good people'. Christians can be 'good people'. Satanists can be 'good
people'. Muslims can be 'good people'. To the tolerant, but ignorant mind, all religions are
capable of being 'good people'.
Again, a generalization has been made, and an assumption has made an ass of us all.
There are some who are honest- there are some who are willing to admit insanity, if only in the
name of fear. There are those who have no desire for good, and there are those who have no
reason, or emotional attachment to the idea of brotherly charity, peace, love, or unity. There
are people that are psychotic. There are people that are evil. There are people whose hatred is
the focal point of their lives. There are people who only want to bring destruction.
In the context of 'good', when such ideas as genocide are 'evil', when we must, as a
species, work towards loving our brother, towards unity, towards peace, what must be done to
those who would never allow it? Do we violate our own creed, and go out to annhilate these
particular individuals from the gene pool? Do we wait for them to commit evil, again realizing
that the goal of complete peace and unity was never achieved, and than throw them in prison?
Our emotions cloud our judgement, and while I will agree that properly attuned, our
emotions act as a form of deduction that works beyond the bounds of our logical intellect.
Sadly, most of us have the emotions of children; they can't grasp things which would shatter
their worldview. They can see a plain, necessary evil of truth in their view, but they can't
ever admit that it is indeed a truth. They will react with their emotions, rather than the logic
which has so coldly stated the necessary action which by most, is considered 'evil'.
When the world's population has exceeded a reasonable number; when everybody is starving
'in equality' because there are too many of us; when the skies are brown with smoke, and the
Earth, are nurturing but barbaric and savage mother, is in her death throes; when life itself
has decreased in quality, merely to increase its quantity; when suffering is unavoidable for
everybody because the majority won't say "Fuck it." and commit suicide. What will you say? Will
you continue to give your food to starving savages in run-down shacks? Will you continue to
support the 'loving' hand of the priest on your shoulder who tells you to sacrifice -your own
lifeblood- for your fellow man, who in return may have done something for somebody else, but not
-you-?
The philosophy of peace leaves nothing open to question, so long as its all fun and
games and nobody gets hurt. But whats the result of every philosophy of peace? What was the
result of confucianism? Confucianism was a prototype to communism. What was the result of
Christianity? The crusades. What was the result of Buddhism, the most peaceful, pacifist
religion in the world? They still. Fought. Wars (and quite recently Japan spent a long time
tearing itself apart in civil wars on themselves; the supposed religion of peace held dominion
over a country, which somehow, instead of killing their enemy kingdoms, decided it was better to
butcher their own).
And finally, its not the common man which starts these wars, but the collective of
political decision, which often is based on the necessary severity of a situation for one's own
people, and at other times based on greed and excess. Religion plays no role in politics, unless
its used solely to secure power over the people through their own faith.