"Religion was created to control people."
- Thread starter Guest1
- Start date
- Status
R
RaisedCatholic
Guest
I would ask them, āHow do you know? Were you there?ā Make them reflect on the same questions they use on theists, to see itās not a valid argument to denounce religion. And, the comment paints all religions with the same broad brush. Christianity is provable, while other religions are not.
L
Lion_IRC
Guest
Why would we create a rod for our own back?How do you like to respond when someone says something like that?
Ancient wannabe shaman wanders into the camp fire area. Tells the circle of cave dwellersā¦
"me shaman. me wannabe boss of you. great sky spirit say you must all obey me.
Cave dwellers take shaman and throw him off a cliff. Resume their camp fire chat.
Last edited:
A
adf417
Guest
I would say if that is the case, it [religion] is doing a very poor job.
W
whatistrue
Guest
āAnd how has that been working out so far?ā
F
fide
Guest
āTruth was revealed to bring people freedom.ā
E
EricF
Guest
Ask them that if by ācontrol peopleā they mean having a standard to live for in their lives, then so what? Without that chaos ensues.
O
o_mlly
Guest
The passive voice often hides the subject. Ask for a restatement in the active voice:
Who created religion to control whom?
Who created religion to control whom?
F
FiveLinden
Guest
Human behaviour evolved. That is, our genetically-influenced behaviours that led to more offspring directly or through close relatives tended to increase in populations. Not all behaviours are genetic.
Some obviously are, like swallowing (which we share with our distant relatives, snails). Some are more difficult to attribute to genetic influences. However, where a behaviour is widespread or universal it can be hypothesised that it has either no genetic basis in itself and arises as a side-effect of something else, or that it confers an evolutionary advantage.
It is hypothesised by some evolutionary biologists that a tendency to believe authority figures and to believe that the material world can be influenced by group behaviours such as incantations and invocations conferred a relative advantage over those groups that had this in a lesser degree. Unity, common purpose, willingness to sacrifice self fora group beyond immediate kin and the overcoming of despair arising from the evolution of consciousness and knowledge of our own mortality are hypothesised examples of such advantages.
Humans organised into anti-religious or irreligious groups such as communist parties often exhibit the same behaviours and the behaviours can be seen even in secular neighbourhood community groups.
So it seems unlikely that religion was ācreated to control peopleā. Rather it seems likely, from an atheist point of view, that religion and similar patterns of group-forming beliefs are at the basis of human society and provided in the past n evolutionary advantage.
This hypothesis incidentally neither supports or opposes the truth of any particular religious belief except, of course, fundamentalist creationism which is opposed by all observations of biology. It is perfectly compatible with Catholic belief as far as I can see. But past experience less me to hypothesise that some others may not agree.
Some obviously are, like swallowing (which we share with our distant relatives, snails). Some are more difficult to attribute to genetic influences. However, where a behaviour is widespread or universal it can be hypothesised that it has either no genetic basis in itself and arises as a side-effect of something else, or that it confers an evolutionary advantage.
It is hypothesised by some evolutionary biologists that a tendency to believe authority figures and to believe that the material world can be influenced by group behaviours such as incantations and invocations conferred a relative advantage over those groups that had this in a lesser degree. Unity, common purpose, willingness to sacrifice self fora group beyond immediate kin and the overcoming of despair arising from the evolution of consciousness and knowledge of our own mortality are hypothesised examples of such advantages.
Humans organised into anti-religious or irreligious groups such as communist parties often exhibit the same behaviours and the behaviours can be seen even in secular neighbourhood community groups.
So it seems unlikely that religion was ācreated to control peopleā. Rather it seems likely, from an atheist point of view, that religion and similar patterns of group-forming beliefs are at the basis of human society and provided in the past n evolutionary advantage.
This hypothesis incidentally neither supports or opposes the truth of any particular religious belief except, of course, fundamentalist creationism which is opposed by all observations of biology. It is perfectly compatible with Catholic belief as far as I can see. But past experience less me to hypothesise that some others may not agree.
O
o_mlly
Guest
Or it may be just as easily hypothesized that rather than a side-effect, a unique and universal behavior is natural only to the species who evidence such behaviors, i.e. human nature.
Since no non-human species does āreligionā (e.g., incantations or invocations) then thinking that doing religion as an evolved behavior is highly unlikely.
Since it is true that not all human beings practice religion, the question of normalcy must be addressed. Are those who do practice normal or abnormal? I think the numbers are conclusive: the practice of religion is part of human nature. (A corollary to the fact that not all human beings practice religion is that part of human nature is free will, one is free to act against their nature.)
Last edited:
H
HopkinsReb
Guest
Ask them why the most brutal regimes in human history have been atheistic.How do you like to respond when someone says something like that?
P
poche
Guest
It is bad people who use religion to control other people.
J
JanetF
Guest
With an 
D
Divine3
Guest
First - I would want to know what religion is he referring to.
Second - does he mean religion in general?
Third - what is religion to him?
Fourth - if he is referring to the Catholic religion controlling people, especially here in the USA and Europe, I would say itās doing a lousy job of controlling people. Might put his worries to rest.
Second - does he mean religion in general?
Third - what is religion to him?
Fourth - if he is referring to the Catholic religion controlling people, especially here in the USA and Europe, I would say itās doing a lousy job of controlling people. Might put his worries to rest.
Last edited:
F
fide
Guest
Denial of reality, and replacement with fantasy, is an astoundingly popular pastime. Thus the virtual reality world - āgamingā - and so on. The search for Truth does drive some, thanks be to God.
P
PennyinCanada
Guest
How do they feel about sticking kids on classrooms all day? Is that controlling?
How do they feel about all the hassle a person has to go through to get a driverās license? Is that controlling? Driverās handbook that has to be studied, go to a building for the written test, eye check. Need a driver instructor, another test. What the heck, huh?
For that matter, how about driving in general? All those red lights, yields, speed limits. You canāt even have open liquor in the car. Boy thatās really controlling.
The problem is that we have to share this world with other people.
If āreligionā means donāt lie, donāt steal, donāt bare false witness against your neighbor, donāt murder, etc. I would say we really need those stop signs up to help us to live together in peace. This is how civilizations are built.
How do they feel about all the hassle a person has to go through to get a driverās license? Is that controlling? Driverās handbook that has to be studied, go to a building for the written test, eye check. Need a driver instructor, another test. What the heck, huh?
For that matter, how about driving in general? All those red lights, yields, speed limits. You canāt even have open liquor in the car. Boy thatās really controlling.
The problem is that we have to share this world with other people.
If āreligionā means donāt lie, donāt steal, donāt bare false witness against your neighbor, donāt murder, etc. I would say we really need those stop signs up to help us to live together in peace. This is how civilizations are built.
V
Vladtheinhaler
Guest
And thankfully, the search for truth also drives the rational among us as well.
blackforest
Well-known member
This argument reflects some of the black-and-white thinking of our trademark Western individualism. Individualism isnāt always a bad thing, but it can get emotionally immature when it turns into, āYouāre not the boss of me. I can do what I want. Nyaaaa!āHow do you like to respond when someone says something like that?
This particular argument confuses law and order with the pejorative ācontrol.ā
Like governments, religions have their laws, commandments, and mandates. I will agree that both are capable of going overboard. Overly controlling governments are dictatorships, and overly controlling religions become cults.
It calls to mind a quote attributed to Martin Luther, (paraphrased): āWe all have our gods, itās just a matter of which ones.ā
P
PetraG
Guest
I would say:How do you like to respond when someone says something like that?
OK, well, communism was supposed to free people from the oppression of religion, and it didnāt exactly set the whole population free, did it?
Controlling people are going to try to control. The rest of us just have to be on the lookout for each other. Does that include religious people? It absolutely does. Weāre all human. It isnāt religion thatās the problem, though. Look at all the educational and humanitarian projects that were started and maintained for decades or even centuries that were started by religious communities. When religion goes wrong, itās wrong, but when it goes right, you have to admit that it really goes right. There arenāt a lot of atheists that anybody would canonize, though, are there? So maybe you need to re-think where the problem is in the God-human equation. Iāll give you a hint: it isnāt God.
Last edited:
T
TheLittleLady
Guest
Iād ask them how they decided to follow Marxism.
Chances are they are not even aware the ideology that brought this statement.
Chances are they are not even aware the ideology that brought this statement.
- Status