Somewhat tangential thought in connection with what's been said here: This reminded me of that aphorism, that it takes religion to get a good man to do bad things.
While I completely agree, but here's a thought, well two thoughts. Playing Devil's Advocate as it were. One: That's true of most ideologies, including, say, patriotism. And, more importantly, two: Isn't that kind of one-sided, that observation? While it is true that religion can get a good man to do bad things; but equally, religion can also keep a bad man from doing bad things and indeed sometimes do good things, right? So that, a fair evaluation would involve weighing these two opposite effects, and seeing which wins out.
For instance: You can have people of one religion discriminating against those of another religion, going to murderous extents in times past (and sometimes even now) basis religion, good people who think they're doing good. On the other hand, religion can also sometimes get otherwise not-good people to refrain from violence, or indeed to reach out to help others (even if their motives are warped, even so).
Another for instance: The priests diddling kids. Actually, not a very good instance, really. Because this is a case of bad people opportunistically and hypocritically using the power religion gives them to do evil --- not a case of actually being impelled by religious reasons to do it, at least not directly, because if they're believers then I'm sure deep in their hearts they know they're sinning and will be held to account for it, so that in one sense, while using the very power religion gives to them, they're doing this in spite of religion rather than because of it. But anyway, such hairsplitting aside: the other side of it may be bad people who are held back from molesting children and adult women as well because they're scared of God and his son setting the devil to shaft them in hell eternally if they do that. Again, warped motivations, but the end result is good, surely.
---------------------------
Bzzzhhh! Lots of words to express an obvious enough point, I guess. My point is, that aphorism, we kind of take it to the bank, I do as well. And yet, I generally, tangentially --- association of thoughts --- got to wondering how true it really is. In specific instances, certainly it is an indictment of religion: but, in sum, is the net result actually an indictment, or neutral, or maybe even good?
eta: I guess rather than a throwaway thought, which this comment of mine started out as, it might be interesting to hear what people have to say on this. But clearly off-topic here, so I might start another thread, later when I have time.
etaa: Rather than waiting till I'm free, and then never doing it, I started a new thread already, by lazily just quoting this post of mine:
link.
www.theguardian.com
