My thoughts on Religion: Christianity

[Mr Camel]

As easy as it is to prove religion is wrong and is a plague to the human race as we know it, you have absolutely no chance of convincing a follower otherwise when they have used it to turn their own life around, allegedly, for the best. Religious belief is very self-centred in this manner. My argument for Religion is this: Do we Atheists, Agnostics and Secular Humanist’s have any right to attempt to rid them of their clearly misguided yet beneficial beliefs? It’s been proven very much so, that religion is not needed to change and benefit one’s own life. But this doesn’t mean someone is wrong and utterly corrupt because they found religion to do this for them. Religion is quite capable of changing someone’s life, even ask one of the participants. I have. But I don’t need to because I see it in my friends. Most of my friends are devout Christians and could never be more proud to say so. What’s more is that they don’t fear those who wish to prove them wrong because they are so happy with who they are and what they believe they are on this Earth for.
So Christianity has the power to change people’s lives. You may think this is wrong, heck in a way I do, but who are we to attack them in any way shape or form. Personally, I believe everything to do with religion is in our incredible mind. Consciously, we have the power to comfort ourselves and to feel more confident. I believe religion is one way of interpreting this, the other being reason and logic. Which way we stride is solely reliant on how we’re brought up and I stand by this resolute.
I, a Secular Humanist, believe religion is unhealthy to those who wish to live their life by reason and justice. It has been proven to corrupt one’s own perception and cloud their way of reasoning. I do not agree science and religion can coexist simply because science teaches you to ask questions and to pursue challenges. One who follows science does not disregard fact for a second, nor do they centre their life on a single, clearly injudicious book, full of malignantly ill-advised “morality”. Those who follow the Bible have either read it and interpreted it wrongly or they haven’t read it at all. Do not think for a second that I’m saying it’s wrong to interpret sources in your own way, but to indoctrinate others with what you just construed is simply unacceptable. I’d like to add that I strongly believe Christianity is not centred on the Bible, at least, not anymore. It’s only used to this day by means of tradition. And if you’re a Christian and deny these accusations of mine then you are only condemning yourself to further hate by the community and you have clearly not read your much loved Bible properly. I say this in your favour because you’re not injudicious, you’re not malignant and your morality is not ill-advised.
I have a deep and consuming passion for history yet a dire one for modern history, so in year 11, I chose to study Ancient History. It seemed only reasonable. The teacher, whom I am extremely grateful for receiving, taught me not only to study history itself and how it has progressed, but to determine a reliable source from a biased one. He taught me how to interpret sources and how to seek out the best and most reliable. This is how I discovered the Greek historian, author and philosopher, Thucydides. As I learnt more and more about Thucydides, I began to respect him for his methods and his interpretation of morality and reality. Thucydides was a man of integrity, and reading about him truly amazed me. He has inspired me to write from the heart and to be suspicious of even remotely biased sources and to never rely on them when writing about history, or for that matter, writing full stop. This further escalated and now I live my life everyday in utter rejection of bias of any nature. I do not look kindly on those who live on bias. It peeves me fairly close to insanity when people rely on bias when judging, especially when judging character. These people do not deserve leadership, they are the kind who corrupt other’s perspective. Relying on bias is extremely unreasonable and I will not be convinced otherwise.
I stand in full support of Richard Dawkins’ argument concerning raising children, in his book: The God Delusion
You do not have the right to indoctrinate your own children with your beliefs. Furthermore, the labelling of children by their parents doctrine is unacceptable and should make anyone cringe when heard – ie. Christian child, Muslim child, Catholic child. Young children who are labelled this way are simply not old enough to have decided whether or not to follow their parents’ religion. “Do not indoctrinate your children; teach them how to think for themselves, how to evaluate evidence and how to disagree with you” as quoted by Richard Dawkins.
When religion comes to mind, it’s not the belief itself which makes me cringe, it’s what it has the potential to do to people and what it can turn them into, people who centre their reasoning on superstition and those who deny fact upon retrieval. Doesn’t that make them feel uncomfortable? I know if I immediately dismissed fact, I’d feel very uncomfortable and regretful very quickly. I personally wish it was easier to choose reason as one’s “saviour”. I did and I don’t regret it at all. I don’t believe in Hell, therefore I don’t fear it; therefore fear does not lead my life for me. Reason requires no commitment, just the obligation to never doubt logic and reason. With reason, it’s a lot easier to love thy neighbour.