© COPYRIGHT: Michael L. S. -- 2004, 2005, 2006
NO content of these pages may be used without my prior consent.
RECENT POSTS:
- Personal Responsibility; More On Religion
- Carpe Diem... - With a Twist
- Of Religion IV (Final)
- Of Religion III
- Of Religion II
- Of Religion I
- Hello Shalom, Hello Salaam!
- Verities of Life Part Deux; Grammar Warning
- Ante Gotovina and the ICTY
- Verities of Life... EU Expansion
Happy New Year!!
Posted on: Friday, December 31, 2004
Hi and shalom to all!
I'll deal with the remaining selected feedback to my religion piece and then sign off for this year.
5-- According to a couple of personages, I was apparently raised a Xian (or in a Xian environment) and now I'm "rebelling." Probably in the same way pimply teenagers start smoking to show their "maturity." Man. What do you say to such tripe? No, I was not raised a Xian. I wasn't raised anything. My parents are atheists. Nor was I raised in a Xian environment; I was raised in an atheist (communist) environment. And no, that doesn't explain why I'm, as many would no doubt put it, "anti-religion" because I actually was genuinely religious at one point in my life (relatively recently). Even if I had been raised as something or other or had grown up in one type of environment, it would only prove MY point, scilicet, that religious belief is primarily the product of active or passive inculcation, as opposed to being a universal and self-evident truth. (Of course, it never COULD be a self-evident truth for the simple reason that the veracity of religious claims is not evident in any manner.) Nor am I rebelling from anything. Because in order to rebel from something, that something kind of has to exist first. And since I do not believe in the existence of Jehovah or Allah, it would be rather dumb to rebel against them!
6-- This is from a wannabe genius and political scholar: "democracy is the will of the majority; if majority wants eg. porn banned, then it's OK." Crikey, it looks like I'll have to give a lecture on political systems now, too.
Democracy is the rule of the majority with the respect for and protection of minority rights. Otherwise, it would be perfectly democratic for 50.01% of people to decide to massacre the other 49.99%. Come on, people, what is this: high school?! Being in the majority does not give you the right to abuse your power. Is the Saudi regime democratic? (And by Saudi regime I mean the entire legal, political and social establishment, not the democratic or otherwise nature of the people in power.) I think not. You always have to have the sense of proportionality and the cost-benefit consideration in mind. And above all, you can NOT prohibit or prescribe something because a "holy book" purports to endorse such a course. It's not your role here to help your "god" do "his" "business." If your "god" cannot handle things alone, then "he" is not cut out for the job. Get another one. You keep your beliefs to yourself, do what you think your "god" wants you to do, but leave the rest of us alone.
7-- I closed the series with an appeal to be tolerant. And there (and here) I was "bashing" religion. And one lady believes these two are contradictory and that I am hence a hypocrite. It seems like a potent argument. Except it's a straw man (my most favorite logical fallacy!). I have not been bashing religion at all. I have said numerous times that, while religion does not hold much stock with me, people have every right to hold whichever beliefs make them happy. I HAVE, however, been bashing such manifestations of religion as encroach or seek to encroach on the lives of those who do not share them. It's not so abstruse a concept to comprehend, surely.
8-- Several people were giving me the "'god' is love" shtick and thus took exception to my saying that I would "tackle, debunk and savage [their] beliefs." Except I never said I would do that. I stated I would tackle their beliefs if and when they bring them into the public domain and seek to impose them on others. I do not deny that religion has its positive aspects and can be thanked for some good things in addition to bad ones. But doing good things should not proceed from religious belief; they should be something that comes natural. You don't need religion to love and respect other people or help those in need. All I am saying is: if you want to believe in something--religious or otherwise--, that's fine by me. Just keep it to yourself.
And one last word on this subject and the subject of people's convictions in general. It's a quote, I'm not sure from where:
"People believe what they want to believe. They find meaning where they can and they cling to it. In the end, it really doesn't matter what's a trick and what's true. What matters is that people believe."
You can apply that as much to religion as you can to personal relationships or the Middle East.
* * *
Well, even though we celebrate our own New Year, it's impossible to escape the commotion of another "common" one being at its end. 2004 was in many ways a catharsis, both for me and for Eretz Yisrael. And we are definitely ending this year much better than we commenced it. So, without waxing all lyrical and analytical, I wish you all a very happy, healthy and fulfilled 2005. May it be everything good that this one wasn't.
Posted on: Friday, December 31, 2004
ב''ה
Hi and shalom to all!
I'll deal with the remaining selected feedback to my religion piece and then sign off for this year.
5-- According to a couple of personages, I was apparently raised a Xian (or in a Xian environment) and now I'm "rebelling." Probably in the same way pimply teenagers start smoking to show their "maturity." Man. What do you say to such tripe? No, I was not raised a Xian. I wasn't raised anything. My parents are atheists. Nor was I raised in a Xian environment; I was raised in an atheist (communist) environment. And no, that doesn't explain why I'm, as many would no doubt put it, "anti-religion" because I actually was genuinely religious at one point in my life (relatively recently). Even if I had been raised as something or other or had grown up in one type of environment, it would only prove MY point, scilicet, that religious belief is primarily the product of active or passive inculcation, as opposed to being a universal and self-evident truth. (Of course, it never COULD be a self-evident truth for the simple reason that the veracity of religious claims is not evident in any manner.) Nor am I rebelling from anything. Because in order to rebel from something, that something kind of has to exist first. And since I do not believe in the existence of Jehovah or Allah, it would be rather dumb to rebel against them!
6-- This is from a wannabe genius and political scholar: "democracy is the will of the majority; if majority wants eg. porn banned, then it's OK." Crikey, it looks like I'll have to give a lecture on political systems now, too.
Democracy is the rule of the majority with the respect for and protection of minority rights. Otherwise, it would be perfectly democratic for 50.01% of people to decide to massacre the other 49.99%. Come on, people, what is this: high school?! Being in the majority does not give you the right to abuse your power. Is the Saudi regime democratic? (And by Saudi regime I mean the entire legal, political and social establishment, not the democratic or otherwise nature of the people in power.) I think not. You always have to have the sense of proportionality and the cost-benefit consideration in mind. And above all, you can NOT prohibit or prescribe something because a "holy book" purports to endorse such a course. It's not your role here to help your "god" do "his" "business." If your "god" cannot handle things alone, then "he" is not cut out for the job. Get another one. You keep your beliefs to yourself, do what you think your "god" wants you to do, but leave the rest of us alone.
7-- I closed the series with an appeal to be tolerant. And there (and here) I was "bashing" religion. And one lady believes these two are contradictory and that I am hence a hypocrite. It seems like a potent argument. Except it's a straw man (my most favorite logical fallacy!). I have not been bashing religion at all. I have said numerous times that, while religion does not hold much stock with me, people have every right to hold whichever beliefs make them happy. I HAVE, however, been bashing such manifestations of religion as encroach or seek to encroach on the lives of those who do not share them. It's not so abstruse a concept to comprehend, surely.
8-- Several people were giving me the "'god' is love" shtick and thus took exception to my saying that I would "tackle, debunk and savage [their] beliefs." Except I never said I would do that. I stated I would tackle their beliefs if and when they bring them into the public domain and seek to impose them on others. I do not deny that religion has its positive aspects and can be thanked for some good things in addition to bad ones. But doing good things should not proceed from religious belief; they should be something that comes natural. You don't need religion to love and respect other people or help those in need. All I am saying is: if you want to believe in something--religious or otherwise--, that's fine by me. Just keep it to yourself.
And one last word on this subject and the subject of people's convictions in general. It's a quote, I'm not sure from where:
"People believe what they want to believe. They find meaning where they can and they cling to it. In the end, it really doesn't matter what's a trick and what's true. What matters is that people believe."
You can apply that as much to religion as you can to personal relationships or the Middle East.
Well, even though we celebrate our own New Year, it's impossible to escape the commotion of another "common" one being at its end. 2004 was in many ways a catharsis, both for me and for Eretz Yisrael. And we are definitely ending this year much better than we commenced it. So, without waxing all lyrical and analytical, I wish you all a very happy, healthy and fulfilled 2005. May it be everything good that this one wasn't.
ARCHIVED ENTRIES:
LINKS: