Religion as a cornerstone of society
Jun. 17th, 2004 03:55 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
sobriqueOne of the things I was pondering the other day was this.
Our society, for a good long time now, has been build with organised religion as a cornerstone.
What effect is this having on our society?
I don't think that anyone would disagree that the influence of religion in this country has waned substantially
over the last hundred years. And I think that's actually starting to turn into a problem.
You see, it used to be that we had law and religion working almost as 'stick and carrot' - the law stopping 'wrongdoers'
and religion providing direction for 'how to live'.
It provided a central 'focus' for a community - everyone met up in church on sundays.
When was the last time you spoke to your neighbours? What about 3 doors down?
The problem, I think, is not so much that people have gotten less spiritual. That, in my opinion, is a fairly personal decision.
The problem is that there are a great many people who are lacking guidance on how should they live - the 'priest' used to play
a central role as advisor in a community. It wasn't perfect, but there's certainly worse ways to live than following the Ten Commandments.
So now, we're gradually moving towards a state of anarchy. There's still those able to choose their own paths, and numerous good and sensible
people in the world. The thing that worries me is the increase in those who don't see the moral responsibilities towards children, family, communities
etc. And who do things because "It's not illegal".
I wouldn't say I was a religious person, however I can definitely see the advantages of a 'community guidance counselor'. This used to be the priest, and he carried with him the respect conferred through the church. Now 'counselors' are seldom welcomed, being seen as intrusions into our divine right to do whatever we damn well like.
Perhaps it's time to change that.
So, hypothetically, if we were to perform an amazing act of social engineering, and create our role of 'Arbitrator'.
What would be the Commandments? The things that would result in one becoming a pariah in the community?
And how should we choose our Arbitrator and advisor? Does it require training? Does it require 'education' (and if so, to what level?)?
Let's start with:
Thou shalt love thy neighbour.
What goes around comes around. Give freely of your compassion, and it shall be returned tenfold. Enhance the world around you, and find that it has been enhanced.
Further suggestions and amendments for the 'secular commandments'?
Our society, for a good long time now, has been build with organised religion as a cornerstone.
What effect is this having on our society?
I don't think that anyone would disagree that the influence of religion in this country has waned substantially
over the last hundred years. And I think that's actually starting to turn into a problem.
You see, it used to be that we had law and religion working almost as 'stick and carrot' - the law stopping 'wrongdoers'
and religion providing direction for 'how to live'.
It provided a central 'focus' for a community - everyone met up in church on sundays.
When was the last time you spoke to your neighbours? What about 3 doors down?
The problem, I think, is not so much that people have gotten less spiritual. That, in my opinion, is a fairly personal decision.
The problem is that there are a great many people who are lacking guidance on how should they live - the 'priest' used to play
a central role as advisor in a community. It wasn't perfect, but there's certainly worse ways to live than following the Ten Commandments.
So now, we're gradually moving towards a state of anarchy. There's still those able to choose their own paths, and numerous good and sensible
people in the world. The thing that worries me is the increase in those who don't see the moral responsibilities towards children, family, communities
etc. And who do things because "It's not illegal".
I wouldn't say I was a religious person, however I can definitely see the advantages of a 'community guidance counselor'. This used to be the priest, and he carried with him the respect conferred through the church. Now 'counselors' are seldom welcomed, being seen as intrusions into our divine right to do whatever we damn well like.
Perhaps it's time to change that.
So, hypothetically, if we were to perform an amazing act of social engineering, and create our role of 'Arbitrator'.
What would be the Commandments? The things that would result in one becoming a pariah in the community?
And how should we choose our Arbitrator and advisor? Does it require training? Does it require 'education' (and if so, to what level?)?
Let's start with:
Thou shalt love thy neighbour.
What goes around comes around. Give freely of your compassion, and it shall be returned tenfold. Enhance the world around you, and find that it has been enhanced.
Further suggestions and amendments for the 'secular commandments'?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-06-17 12:25 pm (UTC)Thou shalt not kill needlessly.
no subject
Date: 2004-06-17 05:45 pm (UTC)Remember, that law was modified by every religios leader going to mean "Thout shall not kill other of our religion. Them other don't count. Feel free. Infact, go ahead, it's good for your Soul...".
"Thou shalt not kill needlessly."
Who defines the needlessly? It would have to be some central definition, leave it to the comman man, and suddenly that law never gets broken.
Leave it at "Thou shall not Kill. Full Stop. Ever. I don't care why you want to kill them. Just No!" etc...
no subject
Date: 2004-06-18 09:17 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-06-18 01:36 pm (UTC)(Quite a lot can be made into good "I was convinced he was going to kill me!" justification, like pulling out a knife, trying to rape you, etc).
It basically comes down to interpretation, is it more important to enforce it on others, or to keep it yourself? For precisely this reason, it would have to be more important to prevent others. The other way around is for very rare people indeed...
no subject
Date: 2004-06-19 08:51 am (UTC)however, saying thou shalt not kill means if you do, you've broken the commandment, no matter what the circumstances.
no subject
Date: 2004-06-23 05:25 am (UTC)Yeah, and look how much trouble that's caused down the ages! Just because that's how they have been done, doesn't make it The Right Way. This time I'd word things a bit more precisely to narrow down how it can be interpreted.
"however, saying thou shalt not kill means if you do, you've broken the commandment, no matter what the circumstances."
Yes, which fits in with the way the government / society currently treats thus issue. If we're going to actively change how we treat people who've killed in self defense (or whatever), then I'd change the commandment's wording to reflect this.
no subject
Date: 2004-06-23 05:42 am (UTC)Cos, well, there's always going to be _some_ kind of need.
And i'm not talking about just people, the same can be said for animals and plants. OK, 'to eat' is IMO a good enough reason in my book...
Wars are a nasty business, but one of the lessons of history is that pacifism just means you get stomped upon by someone who isn't.
no subject
Date: 2004-06-23 09:30 am (UTC)