Bad criticisms of religion

[Night FM]

I'll start with this:

"Religion is about control or preventing people from doing things they like" - This is a terrible criticism since the laws of any nation or state are about "control", and this isn't necessarily a bad thing. (In fact, many modern laws developed out of older, religious sources of law). Obviously a rapist "likes" to rape his victims, and the laws against rape prevent him from doing something "he likes", but most would agree that this is a good thing, and that not everything some person somewhere may "like" to do (e.x. rape, murder, etc) should be allowed.

"Religion is about legislating morality". - This is a derivation of the above. Laws against rape and murder are "legislating morality", and this is a good thing. The issue isn't "legislating morality", only "what or whose morality" is being legislated. (e.x. most would agree that a law forcing people to attend Catholic mass wouldn't be the same as a law forcing people not to murder).

"Religion is about making money". - This could be said about anything, including science. Selling popular science books is in part about "making money", but that doesn't delegitimize their content, and scientific industries would have to have a way of "making money" to stay in business. Being profitable doesn't mean that something is "only" about making money, or making money at the expense of everything else.

Edited September 27 by Night FM

[dimreepr]

Religion is easy to deny bc it generally needs a god to be the arbiter of, whatever...

God is an easy target, bc it can't exist...

If you want religion to make sense to those who don't believe, then take god out of the argument and explain what the people who wrote the bible, actually meant...

 

[iNow]

5 hours ago, Night FM said:

I'll start with this:

Members here would prefer if you ended with this instead of littering the site with thread after thread after thread exemplifying the way god fogs rot human brains. 

[Phi for All]

"The Lady doth protest too much, methinks." -- Gertrude

[Peterkin]

One little oddity about that rape and murder business and the Judeo-Christian-Islamic faiths: the holy book is full of god-recommended rapes and murders. Someone might be tempted to criticize that.

Someone might be tempted to criticize the long bloody history of past ones, of Christians and Muslims imposing their own punitive, screwed-up morality on populations that had their own well-functioning social organization, and their campaigns to do so again with modern populations. 

Someone might be tempted to point out the immense wealth of the churches. Lilies of the field, they are not.

[studiot]

3 hours ago, iNow said:

Members here would prefer if you ended with this instead of littering the site with thread after thread after thread exemplifying the way god fogs rot human brains. 

+1

 

Chorus from the gallery 

 

Hear ! Hear !

[TheVat]

12 hours ago, Night FM said:

I'll start with this:

"Religion is about control or preventing people from doing things they like

Strawman much?  Am seconding @iNow request to cease starting multiple new threads every time you climb onto your atheists suck hobby horse.

[swansont]

13 hours ago, Night FM said:

I'll start with this:

"Religion is about control or preventing people from doing things they like" - This is a terrible criticism since the laws of any nation or state are about "control", and this isn't necessarily a bad thing. (In fact, many modern laws developed out of older, religious sources of law). Obviously a rapist "likes" to rape his victims, and the laws against rape prevent him from doing something "he likes", but most would agree that this is a good thing, and that not everything some person somewhere may "like" to do (e.x. rape, murder, etc) should be allowed.

Shouldn’t “terrible criticisms” be wrong? Or do you have some specific definition of “terrible” that you aren’t sharing?

Please show that religion does not control people, by preventing them from doing things they like.

 

13 hours ago, Night FM said:

"Religion is about legislating morality". - This is a derivation of the above. Laws against rape and murder are "legislating morality", and this is a good thing. The issue isn't "legislating morality", only "what or whose morality" is being legislated. (e.x. most would agree that a law forcing people to attend Catholic mass wouldn't be the same as a law forcing people not to murder).

Religious rules aren’t legislated. i.e. a religious admonishment not to murder and a law punishing murder are not the same thing unless you have a theocracy

13 hours ago, Night FM said:

"Religion is about making money". - This could be said about anything, including science. Selling popular science books is in part about "making money", but that doesn't delegitimize their content, and scientific industries would have to have a way of "making money" to stay in business. Being profitable doesn't mean that something is "only" about making money, or making money at the expense of everything else.

Rationalizing a behavior is not showing that it doesn’t happen.

And once again you’ve chosen a premise with substantiating it. Where did you find these criticisms? Under what context?

[Night FM]

3 hours ago, swansont said:

Shouldn’t “terrible criticisms” be wrong? Or do you have some specific definition of “terrible” that you aren’t sharing?

Please show that religion does not control people, by preventing them from doing things they like.

I'd argue the issue is what it controls and prevents people from doing, not that "it does". Given that laws do the same thing, and most sane people wouldn't say people should be able to do "everything" they might want to do to begin with (e.x. most wouldn't say a rapist should be allowed to rape simply because "he likes doing it").

3 hours ago, swansont said:

And once again you’ve chosen a premise with substantiating it. Where did you find these criticisms? Under what context?

It's a fairly popular criticism, so I don't think I need to attribute it to a specific source.

[swansont]

8 hours ago, Night FM said:

I'd argue the issue is what it controls and prevents people from doing, not that "it does". Given that laws do the same thing, and most sane people wouldn't say people should be able to do "everything" they might want to do to begin with (e.x. most wouldn't say a rapist should be allowed to rape simply because "he likes doing it").

The existence of secular rules doesn’t mean that the religious rules don’t exist.

 

8 hours ago, Night FM said:

It's a fairly popular criticism, so I don't think I need to attribute it to a specific source.

So it should be easy to find a few examples.

[recallblushing]

On 9/27/2024 at 5:29 AM, Night FM said:

I'll start with this:

"Religion is about control or preventing people from doing things they like" - This is a terrible criticism since the laws of any nation or state are about "control", and this isn't necessarily a bad thing. (In fact, many modern laws developed out of older, religious sources of law). Obviously a rapist "likes" to rape his victims, and the laws against rape prevent him from doing something "he likes", but most would agree that this is a good thing, and that not everything some person somewhere may "like" to do (e.x. rape, murder, etc) should be allowed.

"Religion is about legislating morality". - This is a derivation of the above. Laws against rape and murder are "legislating morality", and this is a good thing. The issue isn't "legislating morality", only "what or whose morality" is being legislated. (e.x. most would agree that a law forcing people to attend Catholic mass wouldn't be the same as a law forcing people not to murder).

"Religion is about making money". - This could be said about anything, including science. Selling popular science books is in part about "making money", but that doesn't delegitimize their content, and scientific industries would have to have a way of "making money" to stay in business. Being profitable doesn't mean that something is "only" about making money, or making money at the expense of everything else.

Your points about common criticisms of religion are spot-on:
Control & Laws: Every functioning society needs rules - whether religious or secular. The key is distinguishing helpful regulation from unnecessary control.
Morality & Legislation: Laws inherently reflect moral values. The real debate isn't about whether to legislate morality, but which moral principles warrant legislation.
Financial Aspects: Sustainability ≠ exploitation. Like any institution, religious organizations need resources to operate. The issue is misuse, not legitimate operation.
For those interested in daily worship practices, you can find prayer times

 

link removed by mod. No advertising, please

[Peterkin]

On 9/27/2024 at 5:29 AM, Night FM said:

This is a terrible criticism since the laws of any nation or state are about "control", and this isn't necessarily a bad thing.

The crucial difference is: secular laws are devised and enacted through human agencies, which give a rationale for what is forbidden to whom and prescribe punishments for disobedience. Over time, as the society evolves, economies, social structure and regimes change, the laws are adapted to the changing reality of human interactions and convictions. 

Religious laws are set down in edicts carved in stone, a scroll, a wall of pictographs or a holy book, ostensibly given by an infallible deity and interpreted by an ordained elite, never to be questioned, never to be altered, never to be disobeyed on penalty of eternal damnation. If the early patriarchs in that holy narrative married their sisters or sold their daughters or murdered the people with whom they had just made peace, then, as far as the religion is concerned, those practices remain acceptable forever. Which is why secular laws had to override them.

On 9/27/2024 at 5:29 AM, Night FM said:

"Religion is about making money". - This could be said about anything, including science.

It could be said, but it wouldn't be true. If money is made in any class of endeavours, it's certainly made with least effort by churches and money-lenders. That's not a criticism of religion but of religious organizations' role in materialism.