-RRH-

This is following something brought up in another thread.
http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.p...5&pagenumber=2


My own related thoughts are as follows: People often believe in a God that justifies what they wanted to do anyways.

For example, a bisexual theist friend of mine says, "Hey, God's a nice guy, he's not going to condemn someone because they have sex with the wrong people." Meanwhile, her father is of the opinion that God wants everyone to be more respectful to their parents and quit sleeping around.

I ate Pascal's Wafer

Yeah, I've noticed that too. People don't tend to worship that which is so different from their own points of view. Fundamentalist Christians would be science hating homophobes anyway, and they have an excuse with their beliefs, for example. I imagine there are cases where God's will would be different than his followers, but it seems like the majority of people have the same opinions as the deity they worship.

-Nick

Thieving Magpie

Well yes, I think this can often be the case - HOWEVER - I think it is also a sign of emotional, and mental maturity to go beyond believing in what one wants to believe, and actually believing in something for other, better reasons.

Let us not forget that Christianity specifically does not ask people to just 'do what they feel like.' I believe many (but by no means all!) Christians have higher emotional or mental maturity than people who say that they 'hope' God approves of whatever they do, because they are going to do it regardless.

I would also like to point out that just because basic Christianity is, perhaps, a more enlightened, or mature belief than the lowest rung of mental maturity (in my own opinion), it does not mean that it ought to be placed near the top of the long ladder, either.

-RRH-

But when someone is mature, and believes God gives them certain responsibilities, are they mature because of what God asks of them, or do they believe in a God that asks this of them because they are mature?

seebs

I dunno. Does it matter?

lisarea

I think that a lot of people do follow certain religions for very crass reasons (which they may or may not be aware of). They believe because they want to win arguments without having to justify their positions--so they can always be Supremely Right, rather than mere mortals with opinions and ideas.

But I think there are benign motivations for this as well. People can't believe in a supreme being without feeling as though they understand it to some extent. They have to have something in common with their god if they're going to spend all that time believing in it and trying to do its will.

There's also the fact that many, even most, people believe what they were taught to believe. Their perceptions and ideas were generally given to them concurrently with their religious beliefs, from a common source. Unfortunately, many people get the entirety of their moral foundations from religion. So it's natural that there would be a strong similarity between what they want and believe and what their religion teaches them.

As far as homophobia and the like, that's not a natural human instinct, is it? I mean, I guess it must have come from somewhere, but it strikes me that, in cultures where there is no dogma telling people it's wrong, these things don't exist, at least not to the extent they exist in cultures with religions that teach that it's wrong.

My point being that, if science-hating homophobic fundamentalists had been raised in some other culture or some other religion, they would likely hate whatever they were taught to hate.

seebs

I seem to recall it actually crops up in many cultures, simply because homosexuality is strange and abnormal. I mean this purely technically; for the majority of people, homosexuality is not part of their experience of the world, and thus seems "weird".

Frankly, any sex you aren't interested in is likely to sound sorta gross. That's a perfectly healthy instinct, sort of, only I don't think it's a good basis for moral judgement.

Thieving Magpie

Neither.

Christianity can inspire people to look out at the world for something that is greater than themselves. I believe it takes maturity to actually do this, and believe that it is right. Not all Christians do this of course, but it is something that Christianity can help inspire, and is something I respect.

lisarea

Heh heh. This brings to mind a dumb story.

I actually had a guy once try to convince me that homosexuality was wrong by regaling me (AT WORK!) with a very graphic play by play of me having hot hypothetical sex with another woman, and then saying, "Isn't that gross? Can't you just tell it's wrong?" I said, "Well, sure that was gross, but frankly, I think it'd be gross with most men, too. You know, like YOU, for example. Doesn't mean I think there should be a law against you having sex." *

In other words, maybe you're right. Maybe people really are too stupid sometimes to tell the difference between personal preferences and moral absolutes. I just wonder if the existence of some sort of 'authoritative' dogma backing up their personal preferences gives them the courage of their ersatz convictions.

* This was a lie. I would totally vote for a law against that guy having sex.

seebs

I think it's the other way. I think that personal ersatz convictions led them to reinterpret the "authoritative" dogma until it practically snapped. I mean, people have quoted me every single passage describing "sexual immorality" and claimed that it showed clear condemnation of homosexuality.

I think most of these people would believe this no matter *what* anything said.

I feel very bad for these people.

Can we bring this into the "theists, can we trust you as jurors" thread? I want to see if the standards to which you hold your opinion are the same standards we use in rape cases.

(This only makes sense to people who have read that thread. Sorry.)