CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
Religion encourages good people to do bad things
βWith or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil - that takes religion.β β Steven Weinberg
One of my favorite quotes. You need go no farther than right here on CD to see good "God fearing" people that go bad ... even NASTY! Christians that tell people to go to hell, religious people who want to kill Muslims (Why did "God" make them if he didn't want them here)?? HE said, (allegedly), "Thou shalt not Kill", but, they relish the thought. The other sayings are: " Religion causes us to hate others that we wouldn't normally hate." and: Belief in a cruel god makes a cruel man." (Thomas Paine) AND: "Men never commit evil so fully and joyfully as when they do it for religious conviction." (Blaise Pascal). Obviously, many people have noticed this phenomenon.
I agree , what really amazes me on here is the amount of naked hatred by mainly and sadly mostly Americans followers of the ' good Shepard '.
I have never come across such a rabid mob of hypocritical so called Christians , I have debated fiercely with Muslims over the Quran and in comparison they are like ' gentle lambs ' compared to American theists .
Thankfully it's the marvellous youth of America who slowly but surely over the years rejecting the nonsense that's foisted on them .
Over here a once devoutly catholic country thankfully most people couldn't give a f ..k what religion anyone was , I lived in LA many years ago and never heard any of this religious bullshit , an American friend told me take a trip to the Bible Belt if you want to see what religion does to people .
I read recently that Americans are on an even par ranking with Saudi Arabia and Turkey in the rejection of Evolution ; i detest most religions ( not most the people )because it's regressive and divisive by nature .
The biggest world threat at the moment is not radical Muslims but American fundies who are like a mob of hate filled individuals supported by people like Mike Pence who doesn't believe in Evolution , global warming and famously said ' smoking is not bad for people '
Trump is now a fucking bible fan π Last year he famously said his favouite bible quote was ' do not bend to envy ' researchers still looking for that one π
The debate should have the word "some" in it. Some people are encouraged to do bad things. And that indeed is true. Religion encourages judgments, punishments, behavior restrictions, and behavior mandates. And it promises whatever is done in this world isn't as important as what happens in the next one. These are reasons some people do bad things because of it.
The reason I didn't put some in is because in the case of a religion let's say Islam , homosexuality is not seen as bad by some but by the majority ; the same was true of the Catholic Church here when I was a kid everyone involved with the church condemned homosexuality , to do otherwise was not heard of .
It's complicated, because there are still so many in the world, if not a majority, whom hold religious views and do primarily good things based on those views. Yet, they're eclipsed whenever a religious nut gets violent or gets all up in the business of other people who are different than they are.
Yes religious people do things based on those views some good and a fair few that are bad , an awful lot of people suffer worldwide and are suffering over moral pronoucements made by the religious .
Is a good person that does bad things still a good person?
If a person does severe harm with the goal of avoiding punishment or attaining an ultimate benefit, can they be said to be anything other than a coward or the worste kind of greedy?
Good people that do bad things are not good people, regardless of their reason.
On the other hand, the same fear of punishment that lies behind the religious coward can encourage the otherwise bad person to refrain from bad deeds.
A good question ... Is a good person that does bad things still a good person?
As in a person claiming to be religious the individual will indeed think they are a good person because they are following what they think are god given instructions .
You say ... good people that do bad things are not good people , regardless of their reason ...
The problem with that is that the religious ( as in my heading ) would virtually see themselves as paragons of virtue whilst inflicting harm and misery on others ; while you and I would see their actions as appaling .
Yes your last point is fair enough , I personally see religions as a poison and a breeding ground for ignorance .
A good person that makes a bad or serious mistake is STILL a good person. I've done that and I still think I'm a good person ... of course that is a prejudiced opinion, as any of YOURS (meaning some on CD), would be ;-), because no one really KNOWS me. I have to be extra careful because I have only myself to ask for forgiveness, and I'm a BAD person to ask! When I do a bad thing, sometimes, I hate me! ;-(
A good person that does A bad thing may still be a good person (depending on the nature of the act), but a good person does not make a habit of bad deeds. Just as a collection of sand grains eventually becomes a pile, a collection of bad deeds eventually forms a bad person. Most people feel that they are good people regardless of the quality/quantity of their deeds.
Regardless, when people do terrible things for "good " religious reasons, they are bad people. Deeds are judged with more weight than intentions, which pave a path somewhere.
You say : but a good person does not make a habit of bad deeds.....
But good people can and do make a habit of bad deeds and indeed are applauded and supported by others who are convinced that the bad deeds are only right and proper .
The religious believer will indeed not alone do bad deeds but will see themselves as upholders of the highest standard of morality , it would never cross their minds that they were bad people and to suggest it would be taken as insult .
I can see and have seen from MY perspective the horrendous treatment meted out by these ' good ' people and have challenged it only to be deemed evil for challenging long held nonsensical and cruel religious dictates .
I disagree. If good people have it in their mind to do bad, they are perfectly capable of doing it without religion. Religion is a helluva scapegoat though.
Yes that's true Mint but they know what they're doing is wrong mostly ; religion excuses them from any guilt associated in hurting others in a lot of different ways , so that feeling of guilt or shame would not be present .
I think a lot of people believe it will excuse them from the guilt, but in doing so they bastardize the teachings of Jesus. In practicing religion, one must always hold themselves to a different standard, not above but below. Wash the feet of the beggars if you know what I mean. And a lot of people don't want to do that.
I think religion is very much an excuse for people to behave badly because they want to be on a pedestal, looking down on others because they "believe" they will be saved. But I don't believe that's a flaw in religion or that it encourages bad action/behavior. It's just a tool, the wielder already has bad in their hearts and looks for excuses, and religion is nearly always front and center as their go to.
Ok , let's take an example I live in the Republic of Ireland where the Catholic Church held absolute power over the country of my youth ; women who got pregnant out of wedlock ( a lot through rape ) were shipped of to industrial schools and branded as whores with the full support of the flock and the greater public , now it can be argued as it always is ' well they're not real Christians ' which in fact they are and were and indeed the epitome of what a good catholic was and should be .
Religious leaders always use the get out of jail card as in the no true Scotsman fallacy as there is no other valid defence ; I would prefer at least if they were honest and said " we are doing so because it's based on sound religious teachings "
How terribly sad for those women. I hope they can find a place to belong without the condemnation of those who should be helping them.
Those people are Christians who don't act as Jesus taught. They are Christians in name only. I will not deny that some people use religion as an excuse to perversely parade around their opinion as fact and look down on others. We see that action in this debate site alone. But still, it is not religion itself but the perversions of those professing to be leaders in their faith. I truly wish there was more punishment given to those held in higher authority whose teaching are filled with anger, hatred and ignorance towards others but sadly I don't think the punishment will be a mortal one.
Times are changing though. That horrible abuse in the Catholic church came to light and people are looking at religious leaders with suspicion, which I honestly think is good. They NEED that pressure put on them to do right.
Unfortunately for the Catholic Church they also have the outrageous situation regarding protection of peadophile priests ; where do people think all these priests have gone ?
They are shipped from parish to parish and country to country or put into ' rest homes ' the victims of clerical abuse over here are treated appallingly and the church fight tooth and nail to protect any of its priests against any charges .
If you say it's not the religion but perversions of it just have a look on here daily at the sheer level of hatred directed at people who dare question the hate filled pronouncements made by theists of all shape and colour ; most my family wife included are believers but are gentle kind people who accept others and never make a judgement regards there chosen religion .
I've heard Muslims also say ' well no true believer of Islam would ever act this way '
Which makes me wonder if an all powerful god could not have made his intentions a bit clearer to his children
I can't really speak for the Catholic Church. I'm fascinated by the new pope and what he stands for, I think in many cases he's trying to bring Catholicism into the new world. But I do not agree with them changing the 10 Commandments because they wanted to worship Mary. To me, the 10 Commandments are set in stone and "adjusting them" so they can be free to do that, to me, is a little high handed. But that's my personal opinion. I am also not 100% knowledgeable on it so really I need to research it more.
I agree that online there is a particular cesspool of religious folk who do not act as they should. Heck, even in life there are coughWestborocough but I stand in my belief that their actions are due to their own perversions of what God has taught us. My in-laws are religious to the point of near zealot however even in stringent belief they are good people who work in their community to help the less fortunate. Although one of them has viewpoints against certain people, he will still hold his hand out to help them.
I've no problem with people believing in a god my wife certainly does I find it totally irrational but hey live and let live πwhat I have a huge problem with is religions attempting to push there beliefs on the wider general public , religion should be kept to themselves the same way I keep my atheism to myself .. that's fair isn't it ?
I'm really am wary of the American brand of religion if this place is antything to go by .
Lol. I do too but then I don't have a problem being seen as irrational sometimes. Religion is personal just as my reasons for believing in God are.
There is a problem with a lot of people trying to push their belief or lack of, on the wider general public. It isn't just religion but I do see, again especially on here, A LOT of hypocrisy from a few claiming to be Christian. America isn't so bad, I know it seems that way sometimes but that's usually the news, doing what it does best, reporting all the filth.
America is a great country but what I find astonishing is the way politicians nearly always mention god or the bible or their beliefs it's alien to me and absurd ; even more alarming is the amount of people that think Evolution is nonsense also global warming and it's like these people are anti science or they percieve science as an evil .
Let me destroy some more faith you have with America's representatives. One of them thought a woman who was thinking of abortion....should swallow a pill that had a mini camera in it so that she could see the fetus. I'll let that sink in a second. Swallow a camera....to see the fetus.
These are the jackasses that decide what a woman can do with her body. But I still believe in my country because, even with that level of stupid going on in our political scene, there's more people calling them on it and mocking them for it.
Truly scary isn't it ? You're quiet right to believe in your country it's good people like you who make the country great , the youth of the country as well are I believe the future
No such thing as good people or bad things, for a start.
Further, people adopt whatever perspectives their dispositions and experience compel them to adopt. The same goes for the actions they engage in. The mere existence of a religious idea or doctrine isn't sufficient on its own to induce anyone to "bad" acts. That person must be disposed (a) to adopts the religious belief(s) in question, and (b) act upon them. Should both be fulfilled that suggests some a priori motive to the religiously associated action.
Presuming even that religion did make "good" people do "bad" things, then that would hardly be unique to religion. It would be a consequence of its operating as an ideology, which secular perspectives do just as assuredly. "Bad" things have been done in more than the name of just religion...
You say .....Presuming even that religion did make "good" people do "bad" things, then that would hardly be unique to religion.....
Yes , it's hardly unique to religion and nothing ' makes ' someone do anything , they are convinced or not by the pronouncements made by their religious leaders which they are told are god given pronouncements and right and fitting .
I don't think it's a presumption to say religion encourages good people to do bad things , I think it's a fact .
Whether they are convinced is down to their dispositions and previous experience. As is the role of the religious leaders. I'm a hard determinist, and religion like all ideology strikes me as more an artifact than a strong determinant. Everything is a presumption, but if you want to call this particular one a fact that's fine by me for the sake of discussion. As I said, if we take that as given it's a fairly non-unique observation that holds true for ideology generally. I don't see much cause to single out religion from the pack, really.
You say ....Whether they are convinced is down to their dispositions and previous experience..........
And you wouldn't think that the convincer for them is the religious insruction itself ?
You say .......
Everything is a presumption, but if you want to call this particular one a fact that's fine by me for the sake of discussion......
Well yes I call it a fact because that's exactly how I see it , the question was posted up to encourage debate regardless of the uniqueness of the observation .
I think that religious instruction is one variable among numerous ones which may or may not affect how someone behaves. Pinning the actions one takes upon a single source seems indefensible to me, particularly where we can observe that two people receive the same or very similar instruction but do not necessarily act the same. This suggests something at play a priori to and/or in conjunction with the role instruction may play.
Regardless of your motives for posting the question, you nevertheless made the claim that religion encourages good people to do bad things is a fact. My response that everything is a presumption is not an unsound criticism of that assertion. It stems from my epistemic nihilism, which questions whether we can know anything to be a fact at all.
you say ....... Pinning the actions one takes upon a single source seems indefensible to me......
But if that single source does indeed through it pronouncements directly affect the day to day lives of millions would you not say that the single source was ' guilty as charged '
Would the mostly decent people demonise others collectively without these religious pronouncements?
Yes philosophically we can take different positions and I take on board your criticisms , I recently argued that a murderer is never responsible for his actions , but i do not envisage this defence ever working no matter how well argued in a court of law .
But if that single source does indeed through it pronouncements directly affect the day to day lives of millions would you not say that the single source was ' guilty as charged '
I am not saying that religion has no culpability. I am saying it does not have unique or total culpability. That is a significant difference.
Religious ideology is also not unique in making pronouncement that affect the day to day lives of millions (and, really, we may as well say billions). Furthermore, I'm skeptical that religion even does this because this presumes a sort of religious homogeneity that I don't think even exists within sects of faiths let alone within faiths or between them. What differentiates sects and faiths is nothing intrinsic to them, but turns upon a priori moral presumptions which religion is introduced to as a post hoc rationalization (just as any ideological framework is).
Would the mostly decent people demonise others collectively without these religious pronouncements?
Yes, and they do it on the regular. Frankly, I think its patently naive and a solid demonstration to the contrary to think that only religious people are subject to well documented psychological phenomenon in our species - we are driven to discriminate in perception and treatment, we form in groups and out groups, we persecute and privilege, and we are inequitable in our moral cognition. This is well documented in psychology at this point, and its certainly not unique to the religiously minded.
Yes philosophically we can take different positions and I take on board your criticisms , I recently argued that a murderer is never responsible for his actions , but i do not envisage this defence ever working no matter how well argued in a court of law .
I genuinely cannot see what this has to do with anything. Perhaps because I don't regard philosophy as merely abstracted thought. It's an active practice for me, not just empty theorizing without consequence.
You egregiously underestimate the influence of moralistic cognition. It's what makes religion so pernicious, and it's thoroughly non-unique to religious ideology. It's the original brainwash, and it's so effective moralistic secularists think they've actually got beyond it simply by casting it off in its religious form.
Much as the atheist might regard the supposed differences between religions as trivial, the amoralist views the supposed differences between secular and religious ideology as trivial too. And, very predictably, the secular moralist responds in kind as the theist responds to the atheist.
Yes, morals are an arbitrary construction for the survival and flourishment of societies. Anything that is widely accepted as right is the moral thing. You can either exert your moral will or have it be exerted by the collective society and effectively fit in.
But I still don't see how that means religious brainwash is just as effective as other forms of brainwash. How can any form even come close to using an omnipotent deity? (and stuff like promises for afterlife)
Morality is neither arbitrary nor for anything, least of all the benefit of society which does not exist. The attribute of moral cognition emerged accidentally and persisted because it was either beneficial or not sufficiently detrimental to the propagation of the genetic line of the individuals who possessed the attribute. That people are also variably disposed towards pro-sociality is a distinct attribute of human psychology, to which moral cognition may be either redundant or opposed. Further, there is no collective social will that can exert itself on anything else nor even a widely accepted moral concept. There are only individuals interacting with other individuals, at particular instances and in specific contexts. The (moral) interest backed by the greatest power will prevail. Importantly, where more than two parties are directly engaged with one another this does not necessarily favor any majority.
Religious ideology asserts itself as an incontrovertible and necessary truth, but this is not unique to it in the slightest. That it appeals to a deity to defend that assertion may be unique in its specific substance, but the secular ideologue appeals to equally superstitious and irreproachable sources: "humanity", "justice", "morality", etc. are all exceptionally forceful and effective instruments that do the same work an appeal to a deity does. That religious ideology (usually) makes promises is also not unique to it; other ideologies do this very plainly as well. For instance, the narrative that we outlive ourselves by the way we are remembered by others, but only if we are loved because we did good works, is pervasive in secular ideologies. The promise of social stability and harmony if we can just be moral and pursue justice is another. And so on, and so forth. The particular content of religious ideology might be easy to class as distinct from the particular content of secular ideology, but that does not mean that content functions any differently or makes religious ideology more (or less) effective at "brainwashing" people.
Though I'd oppose that about mortality being accidental and, at best, unaffecting to the functioning of the society, because of its major role in civilisation and since that'd mean it is intrinsic rather than arbitrary... That seems hard and is, anyway, more like a contradiction to your position, as it seems.
Since you admit morality to be a natural inclination, the secular ideologue must appeal to empathy and reason. Religion, on the other hand, needs to appeal only to your fear, which makes its effect much wider and larger than anything secular.
How do you suppose morality emerged, if not by accident? Nature has no intention in developing genetic mutations, which is all newly emergent attributes are. That's all I meant by that.
I never said that at best morality has no effect on society, again because society does not exist and also because "at best" suggests a certain moralistic thinking that I'm not engaged in here. I would agree with the statement that its effects are either insignificant due to its redundancy or opposed to pro-social interests. My argument is that there is an independent disposition among persons towards pro-sociality, and that this is responsible for the effects you are discussing rather than morality which is distinct from that pro-sociality. Rather as religion is not necessary for moral cognition, moral cognition is not necessary for pro-sociality. Given what we know from psychological research and history, moral cognition is deeply flawed when held against most moral codes because people don't practice it consistently and engage in lots of post hoc rationalization of their behavior.
Why must the secular ideologue appeal to empathy and reason? That certainly doesn't follow from the observation that people are variably disposed to moral cognition (which is also rather a different statement itself than what you represented me as saying). Secularism certainly uses fear - you're using it yourself! Secularist ideologues say: "Without morality, society collapses!" That's not playing on empathy or reason, but fear. And it's hardly the only instance, but I already explained that.
Okay, that argument was missing some things. Too much, in fact - it seems like a bad example of begging the question.
If morality isn't accidental, then it is, of course, arbitrary, as I said (discarding already an omnipotence creating it and telling us). Which means that anything which is collectively agreed upon is moral, and there is no morality outside of the agreement. Any moral claim which tries to transcend that is necessarily false.
For society to exist, we need to know what it means. I'd say that a society is a collective of people who are bound under similar laws for existence.
I think these kinds of issues should have a third option -Dead-point- well, one the one hand, We must bear in mind that some people do what the bible says literally -The Bible speaks metaphorically, and a study is needed to interpret it-. For that reason, some people often misinterpret these scriptures by doing BAD THINGS that they think are right because it is in the bible. BUT, one the other hand. Actually, The Religion is not the culprit but the church because it motivates us to act in a certain way and accept what they say is right, when some things are not.
For example, discrimination against homosexuals, or simply telling them that 'if you are gay, you will go to hell'
I have seen that quote and it is pretty stupid. Ideologies can motivate people yes, that includes religion but also political ideologies as well. The fact is people naturally have evil tendencies, if they didn't they wouldn't be inclined to do evil. If you don't think people are naturally evil spend some time witha group of young children..Unless they have had really good discipline early on, they will know nothing but selfishness.