Rebuttal to George Galloway's argument for Sapient
Offline George Galloway stated that:
...I'm merely saying that we shouln't be beating up on religion when the problem is not the religion but the behavior of the people who profess to believe in it.
Sapient's response:
Well that's very true I believe in that.
I'm sorry but I'm going to have to disagree with both of you on that.
Sapient, it appears you have been propagandized too.
What people do in religion's name is not a different argument. People make up the religion, not the other way around!
On the contrary, most religions (especially Judeo-Christian religions) not only honor violence but demands it. To not realize this indicates that you have no knowledge of the Torah, Bible or the Koran, much less the history of these religions.
Religion has fought against science and reason, it has produced unbearable suffering in the world. It's "morality" has not only condoned war and violence, but priests have abused and raped children in both body and mind for centuries. And the horror continues.
His apologetic for religion has no bases in fact and must be countered.
George, you need to wake up and educate yourself!
- Login to post comments
Not only has he not said anything new, but blaming the people (instead of beliefs) is precisely what human culture and courts of law have done throughout history. And it hasn't solved any moral problems has it?
Since religions rely on superstitions, they cannot possibly solve any of the worlds problems either, much less moral problems. Consider that religion has not produced a single fact about the workings of the universe or the understanding of human nature. Not one! How in the world does he expect religion to solve anything?
If you want to solve problems you have to get to the root and cause of the problem. Beliefs act similar to computer programs or viral agents. Beliefs can inhabit a brain the way a virus inhabits a biological host. A virus can make its host do things that are opposed to its very survival. The same with beliefs infecting people. Religious people will not only die for beliefs, but many of them will sacrifice others for their beliefs (Apocalyptic Christians, Islamic suicide bombers, for example). These viral memes are encoded right in the religious scriptures and passed on from brain to brain.
Sometimes a virus can lie dormant without doing damage, but in the next generation can cause havoc under the right conditions. The same can happen with religious, political or ideological beliefs. Yes many Christians act in good ways, but they carry and spread the memes of religion to their children. It only takes a few Martin Luthers, or Hitlers to cause a lot of damage.
Blaming the people instead of their beliefs is like blaming the carriers of the Black Plague instead of the bacteria itself. Yes you can kill Hitler and every singe Nazi but that doesn't stop Nazi beliefs. We still have underground Christian neo-Nazis who spread Hitler's beliefs. Get rid of the plague bacteria, you solve a biological problem; get rid of beliefs, you solve a cultural problem.
Considering that we live in a nuclear age, it is imperative that we begin understanding the mechanism of belief so that we can learn how to control it. Science gives us the tool, education the method.
Since George seems bent on defending religion (and only Christianity, it seems), he might want to consider how *his* defense of religion might underlie a deep seated belief that causes him to behave this way. Consider thinking about it instead of believing about it.
Nor is it just religious beliefs, it's *any* belief system (although religion produces the most dangerous memes). I highly recommend Daniel C. Dennett's new book Breaking the Spell for further enlightenment on this subject.
I'm going to have to disagree with myself on that as well. Honestly I think I did a shitty job on Galloway. I have a habit of conceeding points or being soft when I fear that a notable interviewer/interviewee will end the call. It's something I am always working on. I'd rather have a call ended on me because I didn't play soft then have someone like yourself think I actually believe the concession that came out of my mouth, however when on the call (live radio to thousands) it doesn't always go the way I'd like in an ideal situation.
I really like your first few posts on this forum, much respect. Would you like to come on the show sometime?
Vote for Democrats to save us all from the anti-American Republican party!
Please become a Patron of Brian Sapient
Thanks, but as much as you criticise yourself, I would personally go totally blank probably if I was put on the spot on air. I'm the type that has to think for a moment before replying; however, thanks for the invite. Maybe I'll work up the courage a bit later after I warm up on here.