Originally posted by Bosse de Nage Unless individuals are forced to follow a leader, then I think individuals are responsible for what they do. Otherwise you have the Auschwitz cop-out: 'I was just obeying orders'.
"God will send me to hell for all eternity if I don't" could be considered "forced".
Originally posted by Bosse de Nage I imagine you confine your teaching to your field of expertise -- remind me what it is? -- and don't waste your and other people's time on topics that don't concern you.
Does religion crop up much in your seminars? Have you got any religious colleagues? Do / Would you treat them with respect?
It's plant biology. No, religion never comes up in my seminars. It is strictly my hobby (horse).
I used to have a religious boss, indeed he trained as a minister before becoming a scientist. We remain good friends.
Originally posted by scottishinnz "God will send me to hell for all eternity if I don't" could be considered "forced".
Translation: 'I can't make my own decisions'. Although that didn't really apply at Auschwitz -- from which a lot of really useful medical research came.
But a skilful leader can coerce sheep-like followers into obedience, on whatever pretext (how about 'I'll kill you myself if you don't'?).
Originally posted by Bosse de Nage Unless individuals are forced to follow a leader, then I think individuals are responsible for what they do. Otherwise you have the Auschwitz cop-out: 'I was just obeying orders'.
I think individuals and leaders share responsibility. Sometimes some responsibility also goes to an organization, religion, culture etc which is often more than the sum of the individuals involved. For example some political systems lead to results that no one single individual in the system actually finds desirable.
Originally posted by Bosse de Nage Translation: 'I can't make my own decisions'. Although that didn't really apply at Auschwitz -- from which a lot of really useful medical research came.
But a skilful leader can coerce sheep-like followers into obedience, on whatever pretext (how about 'I'll kill you myself if you don't'?).
Well, he is deciding to defer his decision to an "authority", in this case his religion. His religion sanctioned that punishment.
I guess it's in a similar vein to us defering decisions to judges and courts. Are governments not responsible for the body of law which they preside over?
Originally posted by scottishinnz Well, based upon the quotes of what he himself said, it seems to have been the sole reason for it.
"considered to be the enemy, the invader and a Christian."
Clearly there were other reasons. Based on the story it does appear that religion was a major factor, but if it wasn't would you really expect a murderer to be honest about it? Obviously he knew that if he played the religion card he would be more likely to get away with it.
Originally posted by scottishinnz Well, he is deciding to defer his decision to an "authority", in this case his religion. His religion sanctioned that punishment.
I guess it's in a similar vein to us defering decisions to judges and courts. Are governments not responsible for the body of law which they preside over?
It boils down to what takes precedence: individual conscience or the law. 'My country right or wrong'? Wrong.
Originally posted by scottishinnz Isn't conscience something given from God? A fair few here would say it is.
If GOD says something is okay, then it's okay. Right?
And who's law? The law of the land? God's law? And since when have either of them truely related to individual justice??
For a theist, presumably conscience, along with everything else, comes from God. So we'd expect to find approval for honour killing in the Koran or at least the Hadith. But you won't find it there. So, people do things in the name of religion that don't even come from their religion. People are confused.
As to what constitutes justice -- how would you define it? (To me, honour killing seems irrational, unjust, and without any religious basis. Yet it persists. Troublesome. Perhaps it's a patriarchal problem?)
Originally posted by Bosse de Nage For a theist, presumably conscience, along with everything else, comes from God. So we'd expect to find approval for honour killing in the Koran or at least the Hadith. But you won't find it there. So, people do things in the name of religion that don't even come from their religion. People are confused.
You appear to be saying that the religion of Islaam = contents of Koran or Hidith. That contradicts your earlier statements on what constitutes a religion. I know of nobody who restricts his beliefs to the contents of some Holy book. (despite the protestations of some that they do).
Originally posted by twhitehead You appear to be saying that the religion of Islaam = contents of Koran or Hidith. That contradicts your earlier statements on what constitutes a religion. I know of nobody who restricts his beliefs to the contents of some Holy book. (despite the protestations of some that they do).
Fair cop. OK, I meant to say that 'the word of God' is usually contained in the Holy Book. So, I'll say that honour killing has no basis in the Koran or Hadith, although it appears to have become part of religious belief. Similarly, a lot of Catholic teaching has no basis in the reported teachings of Jesus.
Originally posted by Bosse de Nage Fair cop. OK, I meant to say that 'the word of God' is usually contained in the Holy Book. So, I'll say that honour killing has no basis in the Koran or Hadith, although it appears to have become part of religious belief. Similarly, a lot of Catholic teaching has no basis in the reported teachings of Jesus.
Some people think that the only information available about God is in their Holy Book. But I think those are in the minority. I think that the Jews do not restrict themselves to a strict set of books, the Muslims include the Hadith and so on. I believe the Catholics consider some of the Popes proclamations to be from God (I could be totally wrong on that), and certainly give a lot of credit to what important Saints have to say.
If you look at the Old Testament, prophets were quite common and communicated their message verbally without writing it all down in a book, and even Jesus did not bother to write anything down. So the assumption that something must be written is a bit odd. Also there seems to be a rather odd contradiction in that many Christians will quite readily say they experience God and essentially communicate directly with him (or Jesus) yet simultaneously imply that the only communication ever to come from God is the Bible. Then they go on to claim that the message in the Bible can only be properly understood via - you guessed it - communication with God.
Originally posted by twhitehead You appear to be saying that the religion of Islaam = contents of Koran or Hidith. That contradicts your earlier statements on what constitutes a religion. I know of nobody who restricts his beliefs to the contents of some Holy book. (despite the protestations of some that they do).
Qu'ran and Hadith.
The Hadith is very flawed and its origins are debatable. Many of my Muslim friends don't even believe in its authenticity. To be honest I don't like the Qu'ran either, personally due to many of its teachings and values and its frequent use of obscure analogies... now any Muslim I have just offended, raise your hand and I will apologize. 😳
You seem to want to pick and choose the biblical laws you want to uphold. My guess is that those are your real values, and it's coincidental that they are repeated to some extent in the bible.[/b]
You have erred (to quote a VERY famous historical Savior). My "real values" would be to respond to someone who did me harm or insulted me by cutting off his head and ----ting down his neck. Another would be to exact revenge on another by going after his family, as that would likely hurt the offender more than anything I could do to him personally. There are MANY other things I would do if I had only myself to answer to, but it so happens that Christianity doesn't jive with "my values"; therefore, I do my best to jive with Christ's.
13 May '08 13:05
Another innocent murdered in the name of relgio...
Back to Top