Religion and Manipulation

[_Runtu]

So, its not just that you have a difference of opinions with religions, and it is not just that you chose but to voice various criticism against religion, in truth you also "deeply resent" religion in general. That comes as no surprise. In fact, your sweeping stereotyping and choice of words (such as: manipulation" rather than "persuasion") I believe gives some indication as to the true nature of your "deep resentment", if not also your self-perception in relation to religious people--a true nature that has, up until now, been boiling beneath the surfice and only manifesting itself in bearly perceptible rumblings throughout your many posts here and at other religious discussion boards I have been a co-participant on.

More on this to come on this later.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I note that you have conflated beastie's resentment toward religion in general with a general hostility toward religious people. That's my problem with your ideas about bigotry. You cannot separate the religion (the sum of its teachings and practices) from its people. I like Mormons, in fact I love them. They are my people. They are as kind and honest and good as any people. However, I deplore Mormonism's false teachings and manipulative, destructive practices. And I understand where beastie is coming from. In a sense, all religion is manipulative; we just happen to come from one of the more manipulative faiths, and it tends to color our attitudes towards the teachings and practices of other religions.

But not their people.[/i]

[_rcrocket]

There is little doubt that George W. Bush was put into office through the machiavelian manipulations of Karl Rove, who deliberately engaged conservative Christians in the US and persuaded them that Bush would be their noble and moral leader. . . . . To me, it appears none of this would have been possible without the utilization of religion to manipulate. At this point in my life, I deeply resent religion in general for this reason, as well as the manipulation of Islam to create terrorists.

Is my atheist bias blinding me? Would this current world-mess have occured without religion as a vehicle of manipulation? Could any other type of paradigm have that power?

As I respond, let me point out that I am a Democrat and a supporter of Hillary Clinton, so you can at least know where I am coming from.

Your comment epitomizes what is often wrong with liberal politics -- a tendency to disregard the ability of the voters to make wise choices and a willingness to be manipulated by conservative interests. [The conservatives have their own boneheaded view -- the willingness of the voters to be manipulated by the liberal press.]

Religion is one of the cross-currents of society -- just one. You may resent religion, but our constitution forbids government control from doing anything about it.

As far as the "manipulation of Islam to create terrorists," religion hasn't done that. U.S. support for the Jewish secular state has done that. We provide more financial support to Israel than any other nation on earth. Why? [My libertarianism coming out.]

P

[_Ray A]

Seems like an article about Britain may have some relevance to this thread:

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/12/2 ... gpyo6.html

An overwhelming number of Britons believe religion does more harm than good while non-believers outnumber believers by nearly two to one, an ICM poll suggested.
Eighty-two percent of the 1,006 adults questioned for the left-leaning Guardian newspaper in the run up to Christmas said they saw religion as a cause of division and tension between people compared to 16 percent who disagreed.

I believe the issue of religion and Iraq has some bearing, but not as closely as suggested. The Democrats fully supported the invasion, and Kerry made as drastic statements as Bush did. But to get into that will take more time than I have this morning, and most of this was covered on Kevin's board.

[_Sam Harris]

Hey beastie,

Is my atheist bias blinding me?

Nope. In fact, from reading what you post on this board, I think you are one of the most moderate (in the good sense of the word) and fair atheists I've come across. You don't just look at believers as a bunch of mindless idiots, but you do take religion to task as it should be. As a Christian, I see no fault in your doing this, and I honestly agree with you.

Would this current world-mess have occured without religion as a vehicle of manipulation?

Only one thing I could think of, and I think that this goes hand in hand with religion a lot of times: money. Other than that, I don't see any other motivation.

Could any other type of paradigm have that power?

Again, the love of money being the root of all evil, though I think there are a few more roots out there. Religion in and of itself, devoid of individual spirituality and completely focused on keeping up with the group is another root.

I believe in Jesus Christ, but I don't see much out there in mainstream Christianity that impresses me. I grew up being told I was going to hell, and I believed that. I see people who will smile in your face because that's "the Christian thing to do", but will gossip behind your back. My mom was on a rant this weekend about "church people". I don't ever want to be identified along with such folks, but having the word "evangelical" alongside other labels within my personal Christianity doesn't make that very simple.

I think a lot of people in this world are very frightened, and instead of realizing that we all have to leave here someday and to make each day count, they look to God to solve all their problems. The wisest thing I was ever told was the cliché that God helps those who help themselves. Not by exacerbating problems in the Middle East in order to bring on Armageddon (terrorize Iraq yet pamper Israel), not by focusing on being "God's chosen people", to the detriment of everyone who doesn't believe like you, not by shutting every non-Christian out of meaninful life (and worship) in the U.S. We need to help ourselves by seeing the humanity inherent in each individual, and for Christians by really and carefully reading their Bibles (Romans 2:14 provides a bit of a glimpse into how God deals with those who speak different "faith languages"), not just picking folks to condemn. The lack of understanding of what the Bible really says (it takes more than just a cursory read, it takes a lot of study as I have come to learn, or else you DO misunderstand), is what has driven many Christians to fundamentalism. That and reading everything literally. True Bible scholars aren't in agreement on every aspect of this book, not to mention how it was compiled. To act like God wrote it is dangerous and absurd, and that attitude is what is causing this country to be swept away by legalism wrongly called "Christian values". Makes me sick, to be honest.

Think about what you do when you do something religiously. Today, we are doing our religion religiously. Nuclear threat, terrorism, disease, not to mention the ever prevalent cultural differences that we've always faced, trying to somehow come to a place of peace on a rock where everyone is so different (and that's the beautiful thing, if people could just stop acting like spooked animals, sheesh!), all these things have people turning to God as if he's some sort of parent who shows favors. That is hardly the case.

[_Sam Harris]

So,, you think religion can make a good person bad, but cannot help in making a bad person good?

I don't think that was said, in fact I think that religion, if practiced properly can really change lives. But it's like a snowball effect sometimes, people see such positive results due to their efforts, they automatically think that if they do more and more, they'll get better and better. Life is hardly ever so predictable.

[_OUT OF MY MISERY]

Wow Beastie

I happen to agree with everything you just said.

I worked at a polling place for the 2004 elections and we had many nuns, monks, priests that came in to vote all registered democrats...
Now I don't know who they actually voted for Bush or Kerry but I have often wondered
The waters were so muddied by religious manipulation in the 2004 elections that it frightened me to watch

No one actually was able to see past the manipulation and find the real issues.

why do you think that democrats now have control???
because many Americans have hopefully seen past the manipulations

Now we are in war and cannot get out...I am tired of living by some white man's morals..a man that has no morals of his own
or at the very least he has lost his morals or never had any in the first place

No none of this would have had it not been for RELIGION.

[_wenglund]

So, its not just that you have a difference of opinions with religions, and it is not just that you chose but to voice various criticism against religion, in truth you also "deeply resent" religion in general. That comes as no surprise. In fact, your sweeping stereotyping and choice of words (such as: manipulation" rather than "persuasion") I believe gives some indication as to the true nature of your "deep resentment", if not also your self-perception in relation to religious people--a true nature that has, up until now, been boiling beneath the surfice and only manifesting itself in bearly perceptible rumblings throughout your many posts here and at other religious discussion boards I have been a co-participant on.

More on this to come on this later.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I note that you have conflated beastie's resentment toward religion in general with a general hostility toward religious people. That's my problem with your ideas about bigotry. You cannot separate the religion (the sum of its teachings and practices) from its people. I like Mormons, in fact I love them. They are my people. They are as kind and honest and good as any people. However, I deplore Mormonism's false teachings and manipulative, destructive practices. And I understand where beastie is coming from. In a sense, all religion is manipulative; we just happen to come from one of the more manipulative faiths, and it tends to color our attitudes towards the teachings and practices of other religions. But not their people.[/i]

I note that you are drawing a meaningless distinction, mistakenly calling it a "conflation", in a failed attempt at rationalizing certain bigotted attitudes and behaviors. Obviously, religions are comprised of people, they are founded and lead by people, they are believed and practiced by people, they are evangelized by people. And, religious beliefs are at the very core of religious people's world view. It is, to some degree, the very essence of who and what they are and stand for, and what guides and direct their lives (what you prejudicially call "manipulation"). Without people, religions would be...well, meaningless. In other words, when you "deplore" or "deeply resent" religion in general, you unavoidably deplore and resent religious people in general.

It is not unlike were a religionist to say: "I deeply resent and deplore science in general. Don't get me wrong, I love scientist, but it is just that I resent how science is used to manipulate people. In a way, all science is manipulative. Westerners just happen to come from one of the more manipulitive paradigms, and it tends to color their attitudes towards the teaching and practices of other scientific paradigms, but not their people.

That's nonsense.

Besides, to say that people are being "manipulated", is to also unavoidably say something about them--clearly something less than flattering, though certainly steroetypical.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_beastie]

Hey!!! Wait just one second. I get my new from Fox, and I do not think there is a connection to WMD. Careful how you overgeneralize here.

I didn't say everyone who gets their news from FOX believes that there is a connection between iraq and 9/11, or that WMD were found. But the surveys they've done show that the people who DO believe these things get their news from FOX.

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/ ... 2&lb=brusc

A new study based on a series of seven US polls conducted from January through September of this year reveals that before and after the Iraq war, a majority of Americans have had significant misperceptions and these are highly related to support for the war in Iraq.

The polling, conducted by the Program on International Policy (PIPA) at the University of Maryland and Knowledge Networks, also reveals that the frequency of these misperceptions varies significantly according to individuals’ primary source of news. Those who primarily watch Fox News are significantly more likely to have misperceptions, while those who primarily listen to NPR or watch PBS are significantly less likely.

An in-depth analysis of a series of polls conducted June through September found 48% incorrectly believed that evidence of links between Iraq and al Qaeda have been found, 22% that weapons of mass destruction have been found in Iraq, and 25% that world public opinion favored the US going to war with Iraq. Overall 60% had at least one of these three misperceptions.

I don't have anything against watching FOX, but I do believe it needs to be balanced by other sources.

[_beastie]

Let's take this step by step.

I believe that the actual suicide bombers/terrorists, including the 9/11 terrorists, engage in their acts of violence out of sincere religious conviction. There may be other factors involved in their decision (such as how hopeless their life is, but not all terrorists are in that situation) but the one common factor - indeed, I believe what MUST be the deciding factor - is their genuine religious conviction that their act of martyrdom will be pleasing to Allah and incur a reward in the next life.

Agree or disagree?

Step 2:

The people who convinced the terrorists that Allah would be pleased by their martyrdom had motives other than religious.

Agree or disagree?

[_beastie]

It is not unlike were a religionist to say: "I deeply resent and deplore science in general. Don't get me wrong, I love scientist, but it is just that I resent how science is used to manipulate people. In a way, all science is manipulative. Westerners just happen to come from one of the more manipulitive paradigms, and it tends to color their attitudes towards the teaching and practices of other scientific paradigms, but not their people.

If people are being manipuated, someone is doing the manipulation. In your response to runtu, you have conflated the group of manipulators with the manipulated.

The religionist would resent the scientists who are manipulated those who do not know better, not the actual people being manipulated.

But my point is that I resent religion because it provides a power to manipulative people that no other vehicle provides.

Besides, to say that people are being "manipulated", is to also unavoidably say something about them--clearly something less than flattering, though certainly steroetypical.

Nowhere did I indicate that I think that all believers in religion are being manipulated. In both scenarios, I am talking about a small segment of believers who have been deliberately manipulated by people whose motivations are colored by something other than religious beliefs.

Unless you want to pretend that either no human beings can successfully be manipulated by others, or you want to pretend that religious belief automatically innoculates people from being manipulated, this approach of yours is useless.

Of course, I realize that you use selective comprehension to bolster your own bigotry against exbelievers, so this will likely fall on deaf ears. I humorously note for others, though, that Wade denies that he would view EV who insist that Mormonism is rooted in Satan are being bigots, but uses the fact that I resent religion for being the vehicle that allows certain segments of our society to be manipulated to engage in acts they would not have otherwise engaged in as proof of my bigotry.

Yes, Wade, this is a very, very convincing argument.