Blessed is the honest bishop

Share |

Here is an interesting article by a bishop in the Huffington Post about the churches role in inciting hatred of gays, lesbians and the like. It is a rather candid article coming from the church.

When a religious leader is so progressive, you have to wonder whether he retains any religious conviction. Clearly he retains a great deal of intellect...but only by driving his conflict to a deeper moral fundamental realm. Christians are morally obliged to throw themselves under a bus to protect others from prejudice. He neglects to understand that such collectivism is the source of this prejudice in the first place. He is therefore not a champion of moral rectitude but moral ambivalence. But bless the church for engaging and compromising its integrity yet again. It might well culminate in another church to defend or react to the indefensible. But there is plenty of moral scepticism out there, so I'm sure this bishop will find a market.

I am hoping to drive a 'Greek-inspired' revival of rational self-interest. These Christian apologists however keep 'doggedly' or 'dogmatically' clinging to their 'altruist' beliefs contrary to all the bleating evidence. Oh well....another century before the next intellectual revolution. I think we will have to wait until the next century before we can download a code of ethics into people, such that they will no longer quibble over 'what their bleating minds are for'.

-------------------------------------------

Andrew Sheldon www.sheldonthinks.com

Is religion selfish?

Share |

The answer to that question is supposedly – ‘morally yes, but practically no’ when a person uses religion in order to attain some benefit. The problem with this understanding is that it lacks a theory of values. Consider the notion of selfishness – defined as a primary concern with one’s self interest, which is what? This is where most people stop thinking. But we must ask – What constitutes our self interest? Is rape in our interests? And we have to renounce rape because its against the law right? (selfless conception). Or is there some objective standard to say that rape is bad. This objective or ‘enlightened’ self interest concept invariably leads one to conclude that self interest is good if one has objective interests or values. i.e. It matters neither whether you profess to do something for others (i.e. non-self) or oneself, the issue is why you do it. Does the value have legitimacy. So you ask – what is the basis for prescribing the basis of any value – objective or subjective. I would suggest that it is your nature as a human being.

It is easy to identify the moral validity and illegitimacy of some values because their actors are so pathetic that their actions could only be construed as good or bad. i.e. We are not going to bad-mouth Warren Buffett for working hard, nor for giving billions to a non-profit foundation. The flipside is that we would regard the deception or abuse of people as repugnant because its universal application could only result in a degeneration in social values. But what of moral greyness?

What of a productive person who compromises his values in order to attain a big order? What of capable person who accepts a idiot guy because she fears never meeting another guy? Is this moral greyness? Is it simply a bad choice?

-----------------------------------------------

Andrew Sheldon www.sheldonthinks.com

The moral code of atheists

Share |

One of the reasons that Christians distrust atheists is that they think we have no moral code. They think this because we repudiate God. God for them is a source of accountability or moral guidance. In fact God or religion is not even a direct. It’s a renouncement. It tells you the thinks you can’t do, and they are always things for non-self, another negative. For God, for the church, for others….never you. Why can’t it say that you should live a life according to reason, establish a comfortable life, and then invest in the people around you so you can feel as if you have saved the world? That would be an entirely concrete guide, but at least it would not be around renouncement.

The problem with renouncement is that it establishes no positive values. Consider this…a Christian might suggest…if you don’t believe in God, what is to stop you going out and raping any child. The implication of such conversations is that the only form of accountability is mystical, and more problematic, that these ‘religious folk’ obviously think it is morally acceptable to abuse kids. Should is surprise us that many clergy have been caught with their underwear on the wrong side of their robes.

What religious folk fail to realize is that people can have moral values grounded in some understanding of human nature, be it implicit or explicit, and that these values are rewarded by practical consequences. Of course most of our parents model fairly decent values, even despite the fact that they are confused by religion. We nevertheless mostly reject the nonsense, i.e. Any notion that we should not judge others, ‘turn the other cheek’, etc. It amazes me how churches seem to have lost all relevance to people’s lives. It’s as if the church stays in the 15th century because if it dared to discuss a contemporary problem it would only marginalize a group of people, or reveal its inadequacies. Nope, the church properly should remain in the 15th century…..the Dark Ages…the time when religion reached its zenith. People like it in this period because they can pretend to be a good Christian, and using psychological trickery they can easily compartmentalize their current lives from any possibility of Christian dogma. Any hint of a contradiction can readily be repressed…no problem.

So Christians take note….when you think you cannot have moral values without a god, you are exposing the fact that you really have no moral guidance. Whenever you meet a Christian who is professing to do you a favour…expect some seriously deceitful act to follow. I am not ruling out generosity, but generous people don’t seek a stage before they offer. They just do it. Mind you…there are people who give in the expectation of receiving. This is the beauty of trade….value for value or voluntary exchange….nothing is fairer.

----------------------------------------------

Andrew Sheldon www.sheldonthinks.com