In reply to people who blindly follow organized religions and who muster the collective impudence to call people who don't, "doubting Thomases":
People who are so afraid of relying upon their own powers of reasoning that they turn to "experts" even when dealing with subjects in which there are no experts, and people who are so afraid of their own ability to handle rejection that they never voice unpopular thoughts to those "experts"—even when those thoughts may be correct, are the real "doubting Thomases."
These real doubting Thomases will be the first to accuse a person who has left an organized religion that he or she has "lost faith." These real doubting Thomases don't realize the decision to leave an organized religion may be the first sign that a person has gained real faith.
Finally—as part of an organization that has for hours, days, weeks, months, years, decades, centuries, or millennia harmed people through perpetration of myths and superstitions—these real doubting Thomases will complain that we complain. We former members of organized religions who were victimized, understand exactly why you complain about our complaining. We know that you fear reason; we understand why you fear reason; we understand that you are victims, too; and we have compassion for you.
It is out of compassion that I voice my complaints. I have no doubt about it.
CONTACT THE AUTHOR
I will start with humility and say that I cannot, in an ultimate and absolute sense, know if a particular individual has acted morally. I possess neither all of the requisite information about any particular person nor a moral yardstick that is known to be absolutely correct. That does not mean that we should not make a reasonable estimate about a person's morality. I think it is part of our ethical responsibility to do so. Additionally, I think that we can make an educated guess as to what might be involved in making a final moral judgment about a person. I think the final measure of a person's morality might be:
Given the innate level of the person's intelligence, the innate level of the person's emotional stability, the amount of education the person received, and the influences upon the person that were not within the person's control, should the person have acted as he or she did?
Here are only two of countless examples:
"He said last fall that "the Constitution established the United States of America as a Christian nation." Although the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights says, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion," McCain goes on to claim of our Founding Fathers that "they didn't mean, in my view, separation of church and state.""
By The Progressive
This quote is right in line with my belief that American Politicians spend too much time wearing their religion on their sleeve and focusing their attention on the past. The Founding Fathers were Deists, for the most part. They constructed a constitution that has upheld a government and supported the American people longer than any other written document in history. But why focus so much on the past. The Founding Fathers were great men, men who I admire. But, this election needs to focus on future issues. McCain will not be voted into office if he intends to run his campaign by focusing on past and unpopular issues.
McCain also said, "that the Constitution established the United States of America as a Christian nation. But I say that in the broadest sense. The lady that holds her lamp beside the golden door doesn't say, “I only welcome Christians.” We welcome the poor, the tired, the huddled masses. But when they come here they know that they are in a nation founded on Christian principles."
Personally, I am a moderate. I vote for whoever will do the best good for the republic and perform their duties in the best manner possible, with respect and dignity. These attributes are hard to come by in todays politics, and McCain seems to be farther away from these ideals than most. Mired in the world of yesterday, this man has obviously lost touch with the minds and religions of today. This country is certainly in need of change, but don't expect to see this happen in the next administration. Bloated spending, inflation, and political infighting will highlight the next decade or so of American politics. However, there is hope. The belief in reason based religious and ethical philosophies is on the rise. Americans are feeling the pull of reason, and it is causing them to question the irrational and superstitious beliefs of the revealed religions.
I can remember even in my not-so-distant past arguing for the superiority of the Christian religion because its morals and ethics were superior to all other religions and ethical systems. But once I began to examine the foundations of Christian ethics, as well as the foundations of the Western philosophical traditions, I had to concede that Christianity's ethical base was nothing more than dressed-up tribal superstition. While I don't think that anyone can assume all Christians have the same ethical framework, some suppositions are more common than others and can therefore be addressed in general. Let's take a look at just two of these:
Foundation # 1: God rewards the good and punishes the wicked.
Refuting this is simple: ask anyone who believes this to prove it. Other than quoting verses from a religious text, there is no evidence in reality that people who are evil supernaturally come to a bad end, or that good people supernaturally find envelopes of money in their mailboxes on exactly the day that their bills are due. If God were truly actively rewarding and punishing based on behavior, then he has some serious explaining to do, especially as to why children who are under the oft-quoted evangelical "age of accountability" suffer from cancer, birth defects, and painful injuries from accidents - among other things. The belief that one must be good because it will be rewarded by God simply doesn't stand up to reality, and eventually leads to a level of frustration when one's good deeds don't seem to pay off while unbelievers seem to be doing pretty well for themselves. If you are in discussion with a religionist who is rational enough to concede the point, the next statement that I almost guarantee will come out of his or her mouth is this: "Ok, fair enough. But God truly punishes and rewards in the after life." This is foundation # 2.
Foundation # 2: "Believers" or "the faithful" go to heaven, while heathens and sinners go to hell.
The premise behind this is that by joining a religion and adhering to the morals of that religion, one can avert the righteous indignation of God that is coming on the whole world and spend eternity in Paradise. This is, just as foundation #1, an extremely selfish motive for doing good. I was talking with a Christian coworker and was able to effectively argue that the Bible (at least, the Pauline portion) does not teach the notion of an eternal hell. His response effectively summarizes the Christian moral foundation: "If hell is not eternal, and eventually everyone goes to heaven, then why I am trying so hard to do the right thing?" The Christian moral foundation does not recognize in any capacity the idea that good has its own intrinsic benefits. The average religionist must be bribed with reward or threatened with punishment before he or she will exert effort at doing good.
So the assertion that Christianity or any other religion is superior and holds the moral high ground can be seen here to be a lie. It is built upon crude childlike assertions of reward and punishment, and will not generally produce character in its adherents that can withstand adverse circumstances.
The Deist Approach
Once I had exposed the faulty foundations of Christian morality in myself, I began looking for another way. Eventually, I discovered Deism. The idea that how one lives should be dictated by nature and reason, and not by supposed promises of divine rewards and punishments, was beautifully simple. No longer did I need to fear that if something bad happened that it was either divine punishment or demonic persecution. If something bad happened, it was due to either a necessary cause and effect that was necessary according to natural law to preserve the whole, or a human cause-effect based on poor decision-making. The first I can work to accept as necessary, and even "good." The second I can work to prevent by encouraging every person to live according to the highest ideals of human virtue found in nature and reason, and working within myself to achieve virtuous living. The end result is the happiness and betterment of all.
In conclusion, here is an excerpt from a poem by the Christian theologian CS Lewis that I think well illustrates the fallacy of the moral high ground of Christianity. It is called Cliche Came Out of its Cage:
1
You said 'The world is going back to Paganism'.
Oh bright Vision! I saw our dynasty in the bar of the House
Spill from their tumblers a libation to the Erinyes,
And Leavis with Lord Russell wreathed in flowers, heralded with flutes,
Leading white bulls to the cathedral of the solemn Muses
To pay where due the glory of their latest theorem.
Walk carefully, do not wake the envy of the happy gods,
Shun Hubris. The middle of the road, the middle sort of men,
Are best. Aidos surpasses gold. Reverence for the aged
Is wholesome as seasonable rain, and for a man to die
Defending the city in battle is a harmonious thing.
Thus with magistral hand the Puritan Sophrosune
Cooled and schooled and tempered our uneasy motions;
Heathendom came again, the circumspection and the holy fears ...
You said it. Did you mean it? Oh inordinate liar, stop.
2
Take as your model the tall women with yellow hair in plaits
Who walked back into burning houses to die with men,
Or him who as the death spear entered into his vitals
Made critical comments on its workmanship and aim.
Are these the Pagans you spoke of? Know your betters and crouch, dogs;
You that have Vichy water in your veins and worship the event
Your goddess History (whom your fathers called the strumpet Fortune).
The idea of state sponsored religion sends chills down people's spines, it enrages others, and some people protest for religious tolerance. Many countries across the world still lack religious freedom, opting instead to live under the umbrella of state sponsored religion. The normal mode of human government throughout history was to sponsor a religion. To create unity among the people in order to harness a society's manpower. Religion bound together the Roman culture for almost 1000 years. This religious bind helped the Romans to overcome adversaries, bring culture to Western Europe, and sustain the largest empire in the Western Hemisphere to date. This was achieved in no small part because of religious homogeny. Once the pillars of the Roman Pagan Religion began to fall, infighting and religious intolerance brought about the slow and inevitable decline and fall of the Roman Empire. This fact is due to the idea that monotheists and polytheists of the revealed religions assert the idea that only one religious ideology is correct, and everyone else's is wrong. This impasse has caused the untimely deaths of millions of people the world over.
I am under no circumstances advocating that we should live under a system of state sponsored religion. Religion freedom exists to help alleviate the effects of any one religion gaining control over the government and hence forcing their religious and political ideologies upon us. I am simply pointing out the idea that state sponsored religion can and has worked, as long as society has a homogeneous view of religion and god. In today's modern culture this is simply not possible. The rise of Individualism has brought about the idea of religious independence and personal gods. Religions and Religious Philosophies number in the thousands, each believing that their god is the one true god, and that the practice of any other religion will bring about damnation or personal suffering. Reason dictates that this is simply not true. Deism, provides a path for individuals to understand and recognize the Creator on their own terms. To see the patterns and messages from The Creator throughout nature without the use of holy scripture or divine intervention.
This may come as a shock, but state sponsored religion is alive and well in America today, whether our laws support it or not. The Abrahamic Religions, with Christianity leading the way, always have and continue to spread their influence and control over the American Government. Christian prayers are said at the opening of congressional secessions, Armed Forces Service personnel swear their oath of allegiance with their hand on the bible, and the leaders of our government swear their oaths with their hands resting on the same dogmatic text. Like it or not, Christianity is our state sponsored religion. Voted into office, and given free reign over the future of our nation, by uneducated or ignorant voters. thousands of years of history is hard to overcome.
"Religious factions will go on imposing their will on others unless the decent people connected to them recognize that religion has no place in public policy. They must learn to make their views known without trying to make their views the only alternatives.", Barry Goldwater
This will be the next step in the evolution of state sponsored religions. People will eventually learn that politicians need not use religion to bind societies and cultures. However, the state sponsored religions of today are subversive and clandestine, in order to keep the appearance of religion tolerance. We live in a society of religious dualism; law provides us with religious freedom, but practice dictates that we live in a society of religious intolerance. Reason can help break this impasse. A religious philosophy based on this principle will need to supplant the revealed religions in our culture to achieve personal religious freedom and tolerance. This will only come about when voters demand that a person of reason, with values based on religious philosophies like Deism, take the reigns of government and fundamentally change the subversive practices of the revealed religions and their influence on our government.
State Sponsored religion will eventually become a thing of the past. We are on the right track. Religion freedom was a step in the right direction. If we continue the process, set in motion by the Founding Fathers, we will achieve the goal of religion tolerance. And, who knows, religious tolerance might give way to the idea of personal religious homogeny; then there would be no need for state sponsored religions to bind societies and cultures together. Reason can help everyone learn to understand the Creator on their own terms, but realize that revelation is myth and superstition.
In keeping with the idea of expanding the content I would like to send out a warm welcome to the newest content contributor of Deism For the Modern Mind, Joel Troxell. I will let Joel introduce himself via a post in the near future.
Joel's addition will allow this blog to grow and expand in content and ideas. As we continue to "roundout" the list of content contributor, the blog will start to appeal to more of our fellow Deists and become a place were all Deists, and followers of Reason based Thought can converse and learn. As our readership and content expands more individuals will not only learn and experience Deism, but also learn more about themselves and society in general. And, hopefully, this leads to people living happier and fuller lives.
Welcome aboard Joel, and I am glad to have you here.
CONTACT THE AUTHOR
It's okay to eat apples, pomegranates, grapes, figs, citrons, wheat, and a lot of other stuff. It's always been okay. If the "tree of knowledge" story had been true, somebody would know which fruit or grain it was!
CONTACT THE AUTHOR
I regret to inform everyone that due to family considerations, my state of mind, and work requirements the Deism Podcast is now on hiatus until sometime in the near future. I promise that when the time is right there will be further episodes. The current episodes will still be available via the Deism Podcast Blog and iTunes.
Currently the arduous production requirements for recording, creating, and posting a podcast are taking up a considerable amount of my time. I want to redirect this valuable time and use it to maintain and expand this blog. I envision this blog as a place where all Deists can converse on subjects near and dear to all of us, not just Deism. Deism will always remain the primary focus, but Deists are thinkers; we have interests in science, history, humanities, art, and literature. I want this blog to be a place were all Deists can take part in the growth of Deism and Reason based thought.
Hopefully, I will find other members of the Deism community who will want to become contributors to this blog, like Dan and I. If you think that you might be interested, please send me an email by using the link at the bottom of this post. Once this blog becomes more self sufficient and fulfills my goals I will return to producing more podcasts. If there is any member of the community who would like to submit audio for the podcast, I would be happy to produce and post a new episode from time to time. I look forward to any new comers to the community, and please do not be shy. There are many ways to become active on Deism For the Modern Mind, such as through comments and emails.
The only thing that I will not tolerate on this blog is intolerance. All individuals are free to make there own decisions in life. This does not mean that this blog supports every decision, it only supports an individual's right to make their own decisions. Obviously, Dan's last post makes it pretty clear of where we stand on the topic of the revealed religions, but this does not mean that followers of the revealed religions are not welcome here. Actually, just the opposite is true, we welcome the challenge, the dialog, and the debate.
Well, that ended up being a little more long winded than I anticipated, but rest assured this blog is here to stay and I hope grow significantly in the future. And I will return to posting The Deism Podcast on a regular schedule as soon as time permits.
CONTACT THE AUTHOR
In a comment to the "World Union of Deists Update" post by Bob Blunk, a reader named "Clemente" says:
"After reading most of your blog, I'd like to know your opinion on militant atheism. Also, I'd like to know why you hold so much anger or antagonism against religion, from the personal point of view."
As I write this, Bob Blunk has not posted a response to Clemente's comment. I know that Bob will. Although Clemente's comment was not directed toward me, I cannot resist providing my response. First of all, thank you, Clemente, for your comment.
Religion poses great danger—both to individuals and to civilization. With regard to individuals, I will not disclose (out of compassion for those affected) any personal information about people whom I have seen harmed by religion. I will tell you that, throughout my life, I have seen many people (including many very intelligent people) who have been victimized by religion. Religion is based on myth and superstition. The most fundamental reason for a religion to come into existence is to enable an individual or group of individuals to gain power over others through indoctrination. A religion tries to convince people that it has answers to unanswerable questions that are asked universally by humans. Religions succeed because the universal "need to know" is so strong that even preposterous answers become welcome. Religions continue because they appeal to a variety of logical fallacies—including appeals to fear, tradition, emotion, authority, ridicule, popularity, etc. (See the "Fallacies - The Nizkor Project" link and other links on my Deist Links web site.)
Religious beliefs threaten the very existence of our civilization. History repeats itself. The divisiveness brought about by religion can no longer be tolerated in a world where weaponry exists that can bring about extinction of the human species. I am not talking solely of Christian or Islamic extremists, nor am I talking solely of the "militant atheism" that you mention in your comment. Extremist groups exist only where there are mainstream groups that provide the basis for extremist groups to exist. Mainstream Christians deplore the fundamental extremists who allow a sick child to die from lack of medical treatment. Mainstream Islams deplore the suicide bombings of Islamic extremists. The danger of extremists is readily and commonly recognized. The dangers posed by mainstream religions often (if not "usually") go ignored or unrecognized. Yet it is the very existence of mainstream religions that fuel the extremists.
Nevertheless, to the best of my knowledge, I have never met anyone who has been harmed directly by an extremist. All of the people I know who have been harmed have been harmed by members of mainstream religions.
Deism offers the opportunity for people to "get it together." It allows all people to go with what we have in common. We all have the ability to reason and to be reasonable. In the dangerous future that we face, "reason" may be the only means for our survival. How long will it take for religions to go away? My guess is "millennia." We may not have that long. Nevertheless, I maintain some optimism. I have never urged anyone to become a Deist, and I never will. No one urged me to become a Deist. Yet people come to Deism because they find that Deists think like they do. Not only is Deism growing, its growth started some time ago, and it will continue to grow. It grows because it asks nothing other than to use "reason." People like that! For people fleeing from the indoctrination of organized religion, it is a joy to find other people who have fled, and it is a welcome relief to discover a safe—and reasonable—place to land.
CONTACT THE AUTHOR
