Name-calling is bad. MKAY?

Humans like to put things into metaphorical boxes, allowing us to easily access and understand them. Unfortunately, religious (and political) differences aren't generally “easy” to understand. This lack of understanding has led to countless personal arguments. Arguments that, in too many cases, end with name calling. Insults as simple “stupid” or “ignorant” can have a profoundly negative effect on interactions, making it difficult to reconcile differences.

Name calling is recognized as the lowest form of disagreement because it illustrates an inability to produce intelligent or rational response. It immediately makes the name-caller look bad while also tainting the argument. After being called a name, most people, if they don’t return the insult, feel that they must respond to it, which subverts the original intent of the conversation. Once this has happened it makes it difficult to return to the true discussion (sometimes impossible). Name-calling is like a spike-strip for constructive conversation.

Of course there will always be folks who cannot resist an opportunity to verbally attack others, but we can marginalize and minimize them. I have personally seen representatives from different perspectives of the most polarized arguments have positive, constructive debates. I know it is possible, but only once we identify the problem will we be able to overcome it.

Learning from Christian mythology

The Christian Bible, which has experienced several revisions over the centuries, is full of fantastical tales, vivid imagery, and timeless life lessons. Although there are about 2.2 billion Christians in the world, interpretation of the Bible has proven to be one of the most controversial subjects within the faith. As a deist, I find it interesting to explain my perspective of the Bible’s place in modern society.

The Bible allows readers to travel though history, back to a time when humans were more primitive and literacy rates were low. The scribes who wrote the Bible were regarded as the most intelligent, and obviously literate, people of their time. Appreciating the work they did offers the modern reader a chance to understand how far humans have come socially and spiritually. It lets someone from 2013 realize that humans were still humans, even in ancient times.

The Bible also keeps modern humans in touch with darker aspects of our history, including the acceptance of polygamy, slavery, rape, and incest. These realities should serve as a reminder that our culture is a living one that is open to change.

Of course, there are several pieces of now-humorous culture that we can laugh about. The banning of shellfish and required facial hair are two of the most widely known of these. Unfortunately, some adherents of the Bible have failed to recognize the progression of society; they latch on to outdated understandings of the world they live in. Sometimes they even make life harder for those that simply don’t think the same way they do. Though this group is a minority, they have brought much bad press to the Christian faith.

Despite any detriment that the Bible has caused, it has undoubtedly created an immeasurable amount of good in the world. Having a status quo on morality is beneficial. The catch is that there are various, wide-ranging interpretations of the Bible; subsequently, there is no completely standardized understanding. The closest thing the Bible has to a comprehensive message is found in the teachings of Jesus. He preached about honestly, tolerance, and love. He fought corruption, bigotry, and hatred. It can even be said that his teachings contradict most of what was written in the Old Testament. To sum up my perspective on the Bible: I love Jesus. I don’t think he was the messiah, but I do think he represented the most powerful idea in the world: coexistence.

Understanding morality

Many theists tend to be critical of those who have beliefs different from their own. The most common form of this criticism centers around the idea that atheists are inherently immoral. Sects of fundamental Christians claim that because atheists lack moral guidance in the form of a deity, they are destined to be bad human beings. In other cases this criticism is directed at members of a different religion, such as Islam or Buddhism. Now don't get me wrong, I am sure that members of other religions share similarly negative views about Christians and non-theists, but, living in the United States, specifically the Bible Belt, this trend is most observable in Christian theists.

I have heard countless times: "How can Atheists do good if they don't have to worry about going to Hell?" Observation of this sentiment is disturbing. It implies that the only reason the good is done is to avoid punishment. It also implies that doing bad is naturally more desirable.

The simple refutation is that morality precedes religion. The difference between good and bad is tied to survival and how advanced our society is. As primitive creatures, if killing your neighbor meant feeding your family, there probably wasn't much thought put into it. Only once we became smart enough to work together did the rule of law come into play. We had to first understand our environment and create a culture before we were able to judge moral dilemmas.

People do good things because it makes them feel good about themselves. People do bad things when they choose not to care about the world around them. These decisions are made by individuals in any given moment. Linking this decision making to religious guidance is ill-founded and dangerous. The reality is that our actions and thoughts are determined by the scientific compositions of our brains and our life experiences. Understanding the root of morality is essential to living a moral life.