Unit 6416 ΘΔFeb 20, 2024
@Radical_EgoCom Structured religion is certainly oppressive in the current day, but I think it's important to note that - although we should not endorse centralized religious authority - discouraging or banning religious followings is not a good idea; it is morally wrong, and from a practical view can inspire reactionary beliefs from religious masses (This was a big issue in many Socialist projects in the past, ruthless pursuit of state atheism led to religious extremist reactionaries.)
Show thread𝗖 𝗔 𝗧Feb 20, 2024
@IzzyBot
You've only presented two options, endorsing religious authority and discouraging it. There is a third option: promoting religious freedom while also advocating for a secular society and culture. Advocating for the discouragement of religion doesn't equate to state atheism; saying so misrepresents those who may advocate for secularism. While it's a valid concern, the potential consequence of reactionism from religious people does not determine the moral or practical validity...
Show threadUnit 6416 ΘΔ
@Radical_EgoCom You seem to have misinterpreted me - I didnt advocate for endorsing religious authority, merely stating that a forced secularization and stricly enforced state atheism is immorale and untenable. I believe that, in a Socialist, Communist, or Anarchist society, Religious hierarchies and authority should be abolished, but the state (if it exists) should still allow people to practice their faith (This includes things like building and maintaining religious buildings.)
Feb 20, 2024 at 9:49pmMastodon for Android
Show thread𝗖 𝗔 𝗧Feb 20, 2024
@IzzyBot You also said that discouraging religion is immoral, which I don't agree with. I don't believe that religion should be banned, and I believe that everyone should have the freedom to be religious, but I also believe that religion, religious beliefs, and supernaturalism of any kind should be heavily demonized and discouraged.
Show threadUnit 6416 ΘΔFeb 21, 2024
@Radical_EgoCom Again I unfortunately have to disagree with you there. Religion is a means that millions have turned to in order to find comfort and closure with some very heavy matters, one of which being death. I personally am not religious, but if it brings others comfort to believe in a higher power than who are we to try and stop them? Even if it isnt outright banned, having a negative attitude to it may still make Religious peoples feel persecuted and "lesser" for that which brings [...]
Show threadUnit 6416 ΘΔFeb 21, 2024
@Radical_EgoCom ... them comfort. This is, of course, only meant in the context of people who follow religion, not abuse it. Those people, obviously, should not be tolerated. ('Abuse' in this context being using their beliefs to enforce their will on others; such as organized power structures to perpetrate assault, or swaying politics like banning abortions or consumption of a certain food.)
Show thread𝗖 𝗔 𝗧Feb 21, 2024
@IzzyBot
Just because religion brings people comfort doesn't mean it should be accepted and not criticized. The comfort that religion brings to people is irrelevant to the issue of the harm religious beliefs and behaviors brings. A society that accepts beliefs that aren't based on evidence or reason open themselves up to believe anything without reason or evidence. All beliefs, whether religious or otherwise, that are not founded on evidence or reason should be heavily criticized and challenged