*** The Official MAGAposting thread ***

[MadMojoMonkey]

The problem isn't religion; it's the majority of people are too ridiculous to handle religion.

There are some intelligent religious people out there, and they're cool.

There are also religious idiots - whom don't know what the organized religion they claim to teaches or stands for - injecting their own whims into their faith and insisting those whims are "God's Law." They cannot separate their ego from their faith. They think one can have faith without humility to the surrender of certainty.
E.g. most Americans


I have a problem with people claiming they have a godly mandate to hate other people. Or worse, that by expressing cruelty to other people, those people are done a service.
I.e. that punishing someone for believing something different is a good and right way to handle that situation.
E.g. basically all the religions


While the idea of religion is fine, actual humans can't handle it. They (we) pervert messages of altruism and inclusion into sentiments of cruelty and domination.
So long as religions provide a direct path to the latter, and entrench their faithful along the way into painting the conflict as something other than base cruelty and fear of difference...
they're hugely and vastly more negative than positive.

Entrenching people into behaviors only works when the behaviors are civil. Whatever religions do to entrench positive behaviors, they do in localized microcosms, based on ethnocentrism, historically, which directly leads to seeing other cultures as villainous, evil, godless people for whom civility is not warranted.
Any attempt to tell people that they should struggle more or try harder because they have God on their side is bullshit. It leads to elitism and resentment. It's how you intentionally feed the emotional fuel of an army, not how you lead a productive and peaceful society.


In conclusion: most people are too lazy and/or stupid to have both religion and civility. Insofar as religion can support civility, it is on a tiny microcosm of all humans, and incites extreme lack of civility between humans perceived to be on different sides of that imaginary line.

[BananaStand]

In conclusion: most people are too lazy and/or stupid to have both religion and civility. Insofar as religion can support civility, it is on a tiny microcosm of all humans, and incites extreme lack of civility between humans perceived to be on different sides of that imaginary line.

What exactly do you think happens in church?

[wufwugy]

In conclusion: most people are too lazy and/or stupid to have both religion and civility. Insofar as religion can support civility, it is on a tiny microcosm of all humans, and incites extreme lack of civility between humans perceived to be on different sides of that imaginary line.

I think the natural state of humankind is the stupidity you describe. Religion could be a tool that has helped populations organize more productively.

The worst elements of religion makes the news. My n=1: of all the people I have known, devoted Christians are much higher on the list of "people who do good" than non-Christians. In fact, I have recently become surprised at how good some Christians I know are. I left the scene a long time ago yet have recently been spending time with dyed in the wool Christians, and they're just good people. I've known a lot of Christians like this over the years even though I've tried to ignore it.

[MadMojoMonkey]

Religion could be a tool that has helped populations organize more productively.

... within the microcosm of that faith, at most
... at the cost of dehumanizing perceived outsiders, leading to reduced trade and often war

How is this not at odds with your statement that increased regulations (limitations) on trade are always a negative on productivity?
Same for war?

Aren't you ignoring the effects of Christianity on non-Christian cultures?
Aren't you really saying Christianity is good for Christians?

Would a Muslim person in your same position say that Islam is good for Muslims?
I.e. it is a tool that helped populations organize more productively (within the microcosm of Muslim peoples)?

The worst elements of religion makes the news. My n=1: of all the people I have known, devoted Christians are much higher on the list of "people who do good" than non-Christians. In fact, I have recently become surprised at how good some Christians I know are. I left the scene a long time ago yet have recently been spending time with dyed in the wool Christians, and they're just good people. I've known a lot of Christians like this over the years even though I've tried to ignore it.

If we're sharing n=1 stories:

I can't deny that the few truly (sickeningly) good people I've met have been strongly religious, and while I was growing up around only Christians, that seemed like a correlation to Christian values.

Now that I've been exposed to a wider variety of people, with varying faiths, I see a different correlation. I see correlation between that level of goodness and intense spiritual devotion, painted on a canvas of their cultural background. If someone was raised in a Christian society, or a Jewish society, or a Muslim society, or a Hindu society seems truly a moot connection.

[oskar]

Trump could really impress me if he staged the whole Michael Cohen affair and is ultimately innocent. If he ends up looking like the victim that would be a massive win for him. The reason I'm doubtful is because it would mean we have witnessed an oscar worthy performance by someone we know for a fact can't act.

[Jack Sawyer]

I think the natural state of humankind is the stupidity you describe. Religion could be a tool that has helped populations organize more productively..

So, the Spanish Inquisition helped populations organize more productively?