What if Religion had admitted it was wrong? (Part 2)

Published on May 7, 2008 By Scotteh In Religion

In the first part of this article i discussed how people consider religion as a means of teaching us how to act responsibly.

I received some interesting comments, mostly about how how people felt they obtained their morality from sources other than religion. Perhaps the most interesting comment, and entirely unrelated was a comment from senior stubbyfinger, who informed us he had a large sexual organ. Congratulations stubby...

Right so Religion, morality, back on track. Lets look at the title of this article, "What if religion had admitted it was wrong?". Firstly i'd imagine we'll have some people asking how religion is wrong exactly. Which you know, if you've been sleeping under a rock since Darwin was around, is a highly appropriate question.

1)God made the world in 7 days Genisis etc.

The earth roughly 6,000 years old? I believe that's the figure provided by most creationists i speak with. Well we now know as a FACT (fact as in 1 + 1 = 2. You get me. FACT? Just like the fact you are going to die, just like the fact i'm mashing my keyboard with my fingers as a write this a not my toes - FACT), the earth is much older. The earth is around 4.5 Billion years old. It's difficult to compute exactly as due to the nature of how it was formed. The oldest rocks found to date are 3.9 Billion years old.

The obvious question to follow is 'How exactly did we get here?'. A puzzling question indeed answered by Darwin in his famous book 'Of the Origins of the Spieces'. I won't go into detail for fear of sending you to sleep and wanting to get to my point, but he believed small genetic mutations which happen every generation of a specicies led to how we developed from small microbes in to full fledged humans. Far fetched? What's even more far fetched is the serious amount of evidence that backs this up (galapagos!).

2)Christianity also said that the Earth was the center of the universe.

That the sun revolved around the earth. So when some bloke from tuscani said otherwise, they were quite unpleased! Even after proving that the observation of the planets and the sun suggested that Galleo (yes i'm talking about Galileo here, re the guy from tuscani not Pope Leo I) was right, they had the audacity to turn around and go 'No no no wait you misunderstand us! It may _LOOK_ like the earth orbits the sun, and maths may dictate it, but it infact doesn't! They just appear that way!'. Yes because that's a helpful approach in a reasonable discussion.

We now know of course that earth isn't the center of the universe and that we do revolve around the sun.

So there's two examples for people to consider why i personally think religion has been wrong in the past. On two MASSIVE issues.

Now if i may move on. What i'd like to consider is what if religion had turned around and said:

'You know what, were based on texts wrote thousand of years ago, when our understanding of the world was very different and people needed a different kind of reassurance. I think it's time we adapt a little more to society'.

I'd guess the next obvious question is what would you change? I'm not sure, i'm no council of nicaea. I dare say the word religion itself would need a reclassifcation. What is it? If it's not just a story about god and his son, is religion morality? Is it just faith in something?

I've always admired some of the charitable teachings in Islam and Christianity. Yet i also detest how they've been the cause of so many wars and suffering in the past. Do we need religion to do amazing things for one another?

One thing is for sure though while we are unable to prove that God isn't going to smite us all for not wearing condoms, someone should not have the power to continue the spread of aids in one of the most desperate continents in the world by saying using them is indeed sinful.

Nor should preachers be able to convince people to attach bombs on to themselves in the hope of a paradise waiting for them on the other side.

I hope i've not genuinley offended someone with this, well so long as your not offended by just the notion of someone questioning your religion, in which case your ignorant and i'm glad i've offended you.

Comments (Page 8)

106

Leauki

on May 26, 2008

Lula,

You haven't answered my question. You quoted it and wrote a short essay on why you think things changed. However, you did not answer my question: what are the Christianb principles that are not also secular humanistic principles?

Once you answer that question we can check whether those principles have anything to do with the problems you talk about.

There are many countries in the world. We can simply look at a country that teaches those principles that you think are Christian but not secular humanist as well and see what the results are.

Incidentally, are teen pregnancy rates higher or lower in those states that you would consider more or less religious?

Give us some numbers. You claim that you know what causes moral decay, yet you do not use the 50 states to find out which ones are on the right track and which ones are on the wrong track.

I do seem to remember that teen pregnancy rates are MUCH lower in continental Europe, even though all the things you probably claim are bad for society (prostitution, drugs, porn on television, alcohol sold to 16-year olds or 18-year olds) are all legal or punished much less severely than in the US.

In other words, where is the evidence for your claim? It should be easily observable.

107

lulapilgrim

on May 28, 2008

In general Christian principles would include virtues which ornament human society such morality, justice, sacred regard for truth, patriotism, securing the blessings of liberty, with character that represents healthy living as showing respect for others, loyalty, compassion, cleanliness, civility in language and actions.

Surely, you get the idea.

You may get a better idea of where I'm coming from if you read my blog entitled Is secular humanism a religion and the comments.

108

lulapilgrim

on May 28, 2008

In other words, where is the evidence for your claim? It should be easily observable.

It wasn't long after the Supreme Court segregated God from public schools that secular humanism set in and penetrated the entire educational system. Humanism denies moral absolutes becasue it doesn't accept one supreme Absolute called God.

The evidence is easily observable...just look at American television or read American newspapers. Parents are portrayed as dummies and fresh-mouthed, sassy kids are the "know-it-alls"...yet they have lower test scores in science and math than ever before....up until the 60s, kids used to be able to read proficiently by 1st grade, now we are lucky if that's accomplished by the 3rd grade. ANd when it comes to handwriting, not many learn how to any longer. The dumbing down has taken its toll. Sex instruction has resulted in loss of their innocence and modesty...STDs and STIs are at epidemic level. Johnny and Susie know all about condoms and the pill, but they can't do long hand division or critically think passed their nose. Look at them..they are slovenly dressed, have nasty mouths, uncivil, full of tatoos, piercings, and think the world owes them instead of the other way around. In short, they have a rotten attitude and refuse to accept responsibility.

Public schools are radicalizing them...and helping them discover and part with the contradictions between their new ideas and those old-fashioned values of their parents.

The top offenses up until 1963 were things like talking out of turn, chewing gum, running in halls, getting out of turn in line....contrast those 40 years later....

Rape, robbery, assault, drug abuse, bombings, carrying of weapons, gang warfare, pregnancies, abortions, suicides, venereal disease, sex abuse and even murder.

Before

109

Leauki

on May 29, 2008

In general Christian principles would include virtues which ornament human society such morality, justice, sacred regard for truth, patriotism, securing the blessings of liberty, with character that represents healthy living as showing respect for others, loyalty, compassion, cleanliness, civility in language and actions. Surely, you get the idea.You may get a better idea of where I'm coming from if you read my blog entitled Is secular humanism a religion and the comments.

That's not an answer.

You are just telling me that "Christian principles are virtues".

Loyalty, compassion, cleanliness, civility in language and actions; these are all Christian as well as secular ideals.

What are Christian principles that are NOT secular principles?

110

Leauki

on May 29, 2008

STDs and STIs are at epidemic level. Johnny and Susie know all about condoms and the pill

Oh, please... if they knew ALL about condoms and the pill, why would there there be STDs and teen pregnancies?

So where is the evidence?

Even if we accept that things have gone downhill, where is the evidence that that has anything to do with Christianity or a lack of it?

Give me numbers. Which US state is more "Christian" than which other state and how do those numbers compare?

Also, which Christian values are not also secular values, and where are those values currently taught (instead of their secular replacements) and how are those societies faring?

Stop telling me that everything would be better, just tell me where it is.

There are 50 states in the US and 160 (or so) countries in the world. Surely you might be able to find at least ONE state that is more "Christian" than the others and hence, if you are correct, has a lower rate of STDs and pregnancies than the others. And surely among those 160 countries there should be LOTS of examples that prove that teaching Creation as science in school has a positive impact on society (or on anything at all).

In my experience secular countries (or religious countries that embrace a secular education system) are doing MUCH MUCH better than religious countries.

If you believe that the opposite is true, come up with some evidence!

1. Give me four US states, two of which are more "Christian" then the other two.

2. Give me the numbers for STDs and pregnancies among teens as well as literacy statistics and whatever else you find relevant.

3. Give me four countries, two of which teach Creation as science, and two of which teach evolution.

4. Give me the numbers for murder rates, literacy, and grand national product per person.

Let's compare those numbers and see if you are right!

Rape, robbery, assault, drug abuse, bombings, carrying of weapons, gang warfare, pregnancies, abortions, suicides, venereal disease, sex abuse and even murder.

Incidentally, in Europe America is infamous for two things: the above list and fundamentalist Christianity.

You are saying that fundamentalist Christianity is the antidote to the list above.

So how come countries that do not feature fundamentalist Christianity are not doing much worse when it comes to that list?

111

lulapilgrim

on May 29, 2008

Oh, please... if they knew ALL about condoms and the pill, why would there there be STDs and teen pregnancies?

Knock, knock, it's been proven that condoms are not effective agasint contracting STDs and knowing about the pill doesn't prevent pregnancies. What prevents contracting STDs and pregnancy is practicing chastity. Christianity teaches to practice chastisy and secular humanism teaches sexual libertinism.

What are Christian principles that are NOT secular principles?

Chastity before marriage fidelty aferwards is one Christian principle.

Sex instruction in public schools teaches youth to engage in sex with anyone they choose whenever they FEEL they are ready, as long as they do it "safely"....BUT IT'S A LIE, BECASUE THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS SAFE SEX.

Christian principles teach telling the truth, while some secular principles are evidence that lying is OK.

As to the rest of your "demands" to show this and prove that, my commments in #105 and 108 are enough to prove my claim.

112

Leauki

on May 29, 2008

Chastity before marriage fidelity afterwards is one Christian principle.

It is also a Muslim principle. Should we compare Muslim countries (where that principle is practices) to secular countries (where it is not)?

Sex instruction in public schools teaches youths to engage in sex with anyone they choose whenever they FEEL they are ready, as long as they do it "safely"....BUT IT'S A LIE, BECAUSE THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS SAFE SEX.

Actually, I don't know what kind of school you sent your kids to, but in my school (a perfectly secular German school with not even a local Christian fundamentalist group to protest that fact) certainly didn't teach that.

Either way, you are making a statement about what a school teaches, not about the relationship between it and the effects.

To show a relationship between the two, no matter how obvious it is to someone who already agrees with you, you would have to show examples.

Christian principles teach telling the truth, while some secular principles are evidence that lying is OK.

That's a lie about secular principles. Where was the Christian principle when you told it?

As to the rest of your "demands" to show this and prove that, my commments in #105 and 108 are enough to prove my claim.

You know, I _knew_ you wouldn't come up with any evidence for your claims. I knew it was not so easy as you simply pointing to two example states.

There is no evidence for your arguments and you know it.

My challenge stands.

Give me four states and four countries that exhibit the one and the other teaching system and show how the two of each that are more "Christian" produce a better society.

If you cannot even tell me which US state you think is more "Christian" than which other US state, why should I even bother when you claim that making the US more "Christian" would have a positive effect? You DON'T KNOW what effect it would have because you cannot even identify US states that ARE more "Christian" than others.

113

SanChonino

on May 29, 2008

A bit of lazy research done on the fly for you all . . .

Here's a chart of teen pregnancy rates, per 1000.

Now, disregard if you want the color scheme. It's fairly obvious that it's split along usual party affiliation, with the red meaning mostly Republican states, the blue being mostly Democratic states. Just pay attention to the numbers.

It seems like most of the teen pregnancy in the nation seems concentrated in the Bible Belt, right along the southern third of the country. The lowest teen pregnancy rates are up in New England.

Now, let's look at some maps of church attendance from those two areas. (Data from The Association of Religion Data Archives.)

First, the south of the US:

Pay attention to the color-coding on the side. Now here's New England.

Not a ton of difference in religious attendance, but New England has noticeably less churchgoing and a whole lot less teen pregnancy.

So far, your theory is 0/1, Lula. Care to rebut?

114

lulapilgrim

on May 29, 2008

You are correct teaching Creationism or mentioning God in schools is illegal....in the USA ever since 1963, God and morality has been kicked out of all government education aka public schools.

We've been reaping the worldwind ever since.

What does that mean?

It means we've had 45 years to examine what has happened since God and all semblances of Christianity were removed from public schools. Christian principles were replaced by atheist/secular humanistic principles.

Since then Math and verbal scores are down...
Teen suicide is up, way up...
Illegal drug use is up, way up..
criminal arrests of teens is way up...
Births to unmarried girls is way up..
one in 4 of our teens are infected with an STD..

This was my original point.

Your graph shows teen rates for 2002. Now, find one that shows teen pregnancy rates for 1963 or before and we'll be comparing apples with apples.

115

SanChonino

on May 29, 2008

This was my original point.

And my point was that the places where God is the 'strongest' in the country are the places where the most girls are getting knocked up.

Now, find one that shows teen pregnancy rates for 1963 or before and we'll be comparing apples with apples.

Why don't you, since you're the one that refuses to back up your assertions with evidence?

116

SetarcosNous

on May 29, 2008

Now, find one that shows teen pregnancy rates for 1963 or before and we'll be comparing apples with apples.

Why don't you, since you're the one that refuses to back up your assertions with evidence?

Well, see lula's challenge here would be to find an accurate one. Back then, people tended to hide things like teenage pregnancies much more so than they do now; sending Sally off to live with another family member somewhere else. Same problem with STD's and sexual practices in general, there wasn't exactly a lot of bookkeeping being done on such matters back then.

117

Leauki

on May 30, 2008

Lula,

Comparing stats over time only tells us what changed over time. It doesn't tell us _why_ it changed.

If you claim that a lack of religion caused the change, you need evidence for that. Too many things changed between the 50s and today. A whole of changes could have caused an increase in teen pregnancies. (Plus there is the issue of those things being well-hidden in the past and not so much now any more, probably due to the lower morals of people today? Seems like there is a secular principle of honesty that wasn't as pervasive during the more Christian era.)

I notice that Utah appears in the lower half of the statistics.

And even though it is surrounded by immoral states (i.e. very "Christian" states and California, and I use our working definition of "immoral" here, measured in teen pregnancies). I conclude that Mormonism seems to help.

And my point was that the places where God is the 'strongest' in the country are the places where the most girls are getting knocked up.

So we should keep G-d out of the classroom in order to keep up with those states that do.

Same problem with STD's and sexual practices in general, there wasn't exactly a lot of bookkeeping being done on such matters back then.

So perhaps we should go back to the old tradition of keeping quiet about these things? Or would that be a problem what with "honesty" being a "Christian" principle?

118

Leauki

on May 30, 2008

Results:

1. Teen pregnancy levels are highest were Christian fundamentalism is most influential.

2. Teen pregnancy levels are lowest where secularism is most influential.

3. Except for California, where people are apparently both secular and immoral (still using our working definition of immorality).

4. Utah is in the lower half of the stats, suggesting that Mormonism does not have the detrimental effects that Christian fundamentalism appears to have.

5. In a time where teen pregnancies were not reported as freely as today, teen pregnancy levels were officially lower. We do not know yet how much that has to do with the "Christian" principle of honesty.

Comments, suggestions?

119

Leauki

on May 30, 2008

That was fun! Thanks, SanChonino!

120

SetarcosNous

on May 30, 2008

Same problem with STD's and sexual practices in general, there wasn't exactly a lot of bookkeeping being done on such matters back then.

So perhaps we should go back to the old tradition of keeping quiet about these things? Or would that be a problem what with "honesty" being a "Christian" principle?

I think you misunderstood my point. It was that even if statistics for the earlier time periods did show lower teenage pregnancies, std rates, etc it would probably be more indicative of lower reporting, not necessarily lower actual instances.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!