|
Home | About Us | Articles | Membership | Contact Us | Links | Site Map
ATHEIST FOUNDATION OF
AUSTRALIA INC
THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE
SMUGLY
by David
Nicholls
Since time immemorial humans have
experimented with the seemingly dual concepts of good and evil. Religion has
more than somewhat jumped on the bandwagon with the introduction of rules,
which, in reality, are just fluffed up conventions of behaviour of any
reasonable society. There is nothing new or marvellous, concerning good and
evil, in Biblical commandments and expectations, which would take it beyond
societal norms. If that book or others like it had never existed, the world
would not be in either turmoil or mourning.
Most likely, it would be a
better place or it may just be that Bible type books are necessary in exposing
and eventually ridding the badder parts of our nature. Not by an acceptance of
their content as a positive influence but by the recognition they are all
flawed by an out-of-date lack of understanding of the human condition.
The Bible and similar religious writings, promote a humanity that does
not exist. People take on the role of creatures of ‘God’ with equableness in
his sight. If ‘God’ considers us equal, then we must be. The
translation of this into, “if you are not equal, then you are morally
deficient” arrives soon after. This key self-righteous thought has brought on
more unhappiness for humanity than any other.
A more perfect
people-controlling-code of conduct has not been invented, than the
brainwashing of guilt onto young minds and then offering partial escape if the
party line is towed. This mentally devastating hook and salve has been a
process in continual refinement since time began. Most religions teach their
adherents to be guilty about everything. They even have listed the seven
cardinal sins, which really is just a list of stuff humans do from time to
time, for no other reason than being humans.
It has always been the
case with the controllers of societies not having so much guilt as have the
“common people”. The very effective “guilt” tool has kept the “masses” in line
and accepting their lot in life since its inception by the witchdoctor or
equal.
Unfortunately for the religious of today, science has very
persuasively concluded that humans are not born equal, in a genetic sense, nor
have they necessarily the same opportunities in the nurturing sense. The
creation of huge differences in potential for successful life in society is
assured by nature and nurture and not by moral good or badness.
That
religion is still asking of its members to accept “their cross”, is a strong
influence on retaining that unfair position in life. It also sends a message
to those-with-all that they must be doing the correct thing, being favoured by
God as they are. Here begins an attitude that defies rationality,
where the system beneficiaries make judgement, which does not do justice in
recognition of the plight of the less fortunate.
The smug have come
into existence.
Religion stands condemned as a dismal failure in
retention of its “equal ness before God” policy. That it still preaches
equality of humanity instead of for humanity is very telling of
conscious decisions to do so. And, as far as they are concerned, for very good
reasons.
Good and evil are outcomes, not realities. Humans may be able
to be moulded to do good or bad deeds but good and evil do not exist as
identities only as resulting actions. Go(o)d and the (D)evil are only
imaginary manifestations brought about by inadequate understanding of
ourselves long ago. That the clergy has sunk to such a low level by continuing
to “push” these antiquated notions, knowing full-well that science can give a
far better insight, is indeed an expose of their desperation for continuance
at any cost. Good and evil are the lynchpins and the lifeblood of religions
and without them religions cannot exist.
The role of the smugly
self-righteous laity, in its condemnation of those it finds “morally wanting”,
is one of vital importance in keeping religious institutions ticking-over. In
their hands rests the fate of the “societal challenged”, and it never ceases
to amaze how they do so enjoy administering their duties. Repugnant to the
notion of fair play as this behaviour is, it should stand out as a shining
example of what not to be.
Good, bad and smugly actions are nothing
more than circumstantial occurrences and the sooner humanity implants that
message deep into its psyche, the sooner those words will lose their
unwarranted power, not just for the benefit of some, but for
all.

|