Who ever said that Religion and Morality were Synonyms?
Posted: Saturday, July 12, 2008
by Rhonda Lipstein
Sanctuaire Soul's Sanctuary
Let's get things straight right off the top here, government and religion have no place mingling when it comes to anything that is considered "official", "binding" or otherwise influencing of the citizens of ANY lands. Government exists to provide guidelines, otherwise known as "laws" in today's world, that help its citizens to lead productive lives that are safe, secure and not impeding upon the choices and lives of others.
Government deals with a territories peoples as ONE, not as subdivisions of various sects, creeds, colours, or for that matter, religious denominations. The minute one brings religion into government, they are automatically segregating the very population they exist to protect and provide for.
What kind of government provides for only "some of its citizens".......in theory of course....in the TRUE sense of why government SHOULD exist that is.
We all know, government, for the most part, especially the most powerfully influential of parts, is very skewed to servicing the elitist few.
Nevertheless, that is not to which I speak today.
Morality as synonymous with religion is a wholly different bag of beans.
What is moral to one, is wholly a different bag of beans to another, and trust me when I say, some may find your bag quite the fermenting stench......
To the polygamists, morality is marrying a young virgin girl, having as many babies with her as one can and continuously adding to your family, by marrying more young virgin girls, as you, the male, continue to age, and further your age range from your new virgin brides.
Don't see too many roman catholics finding much morality in that, do you?
Then again, not too sure you would find too many jesuits supporting a roman catholics belief that going to the hospital to get medical care, not only a moral choice, but obligation if one's life is threatened.
I could continue to elucidate discrepancies in moral codes and religious beliefs, however, I do believe the point has been made, more than clearly.
The bottom line is, to assume religion is moral is to redefine the meaning of moral and more so, to hold all accountable to the same definition therein, hence obliterating any variations in religious belief systems as well.
The real question is, should religious or government bodies have the right, that we have so happily given to them, to dictate the means and ways by which we choose to live our lives?
The TRUTH is, WE have given them this right and then turn around and complain when we don't like how they have chosen to use it, instead of relegating responsibility for our lives back where it belongs, in OUR HANDS.
Sure, it's easier, let someone else worry about that which is right and wrong, let someone else tell me what to do and what not to do, what is expected of me, and how to go about fulfilling these expectations.
We have all seen the resulting effects of giving up our own personal powers to the few we deem "responsible", "capable", & "intellectual" enough to be able to surmise that which is required, desired, and essential to every single individual on this planet.......
Some might say, the government is OUR GOD!!!!! When seen in the light of truth, by the very powers we have given up, given in, and given over, to them.
This Article has been viewed 337 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
Top-level comments on this article: (6 total)hi rhonda,
this was a very well written, interesting article. it is obvious you have much to share. i hope you continue writing. you brought up a lot of good points. thanks for sharing,
best regards,
sue thomThanks so much for your kind words of support and acknowledgement Sue, they are most greatly appreciated.I am very happy my writing was able to bring enjoyment into your beingness.Blessedly BERoni
Is black really black and is white really white, are we real or are we imaginary, is water really water and air, air, just what is what? The glue that holds society together is the recognized acceptable standard of the majority, the way we choose to live and do live, the laws we obey or at least we write and expect people to obey, otherwise society just does not exist. As for religion a belief of varied views. Do you blieve, or do you not, etc, etc, etc. The fact is whatever your beliefs they will influence your actions. So if we cannot establish norms based on recognized and accepted principals then everyone just do your thing. As for forcing your views upon someone else no. Yet that does not mean those voews do not influence all you do, in what you ahve done or failed to do. The choice yours. Yes it is all about you.i'm flowin with ya and then......mind interruptus......lost and unsure...regardless, i greatly appreciate your having taken the time to read, digest and further comment, thereafter.we are a universal family of diverse eclectic members, and thus, several thoughts, and opinions of diversity, bound to be abound :O)i thank you for sharing yours!Blessedly BEroniMr. Melaccio is wrong on this point. Remember there was a time when the majority accepted slavery as the accepted morality. It is the government's duty to protect the rights of the minority, even if unpopular with the majority. In Nazi Germany, the acceptable standard of morality was to exterminate non-Aryans.In fact, this country does not have a tradition of homogeneous religious principles, that is a 20th Century myth concocted by the evangelist movement.
Good article, Rhonda. You bring out some very interesting points. Gives us lots to think about.
Thanks for sharing your views with us.
Sandra'tis my pleasure Sandra, Thank YOU for taking the moment to enjoy the writing and more so, commenting thereafter :O)I am most moved, and deeply appreciative for the acknowledgement of thoughts stirred, and ideas pondered as a result.Blessedly BE,roni
Rhonda, I agree. Well organized thoughts and presentation in written form. Thank you for giving me more to consider. I like the look of your site! I saw it a couple of days ago. Really neat and interesting!Thank YOU!!!My my my, I am very touched, you ventured beyond and took the journey through Sanctuaire Soul's Sanctuary, I am humbled and honoured :O)Please do check back in on our Lady Web in a few weeks, we are revamping her, including putting several of our physically manifest services, online and thus manifesting GLOBALLY for ALL, as intended to BE :O)Thank you, for reading the article, for writing and sharing your thoughts, and your generous kudos :O)All are very appreciated.Blessedly BE,roni
Ah Roni,
Say it ain't so! If you were God and allowed everyone to think what they want to think because you wanted them to love you for who you are, and you wrote a bible to tell the truth, but everyone still wanted to believe their own way, would you still be God, would your word still be the truth?Ah Jay, if I were god, {which funny to mention it, i think WE ALL ARE}, I would not hold ANY to beleiving in MY TRUTH, but instead, seeking out their own :O)A god of LOVE does not love all by entrapping their children/loved ones into their own ideals and "personal truths", nor do they reprimand those who do not have the awareness to KNOW these TRUTHS....simply, they love and send guidance, usually from within the BEing, themselves that they may discover, unto their own, not because another has so deemed it to be, TRUTH.......Thanks for the little role playing exercise as god to all, not one i have ever assumed personally, but definitely an appreciated exercise :O)Blessedly BEroni
Roni, here's what I get from your article. 1-Government provides laws to protect its people. 2-When government brings religion into the mix it segregates its people and doesn't protect them all. 3-Religion and morality are not the same thing. So I have questions: When a law is established to protect the people, isn't somebody making a moral judgement? Whose definition of "moral" is used, and how did that individual determine that definition? In a utopian society where there is no belief in any supreme being, maybe you can get away with this argument, but this is the real world, and EVERY society and government we have is influenced by religious beliefs. As you so deftly stated, Catholic morals differ from Jesuit morals, which differ from Mormon morals (and we could add Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist, and many others). Frankly, I don't see how you can create ANY law without somebody being able to point to a particular religious group and say "Ah, but that's what THEY believe!" Going to be very hard to create laws and leave religious morality out of the equation. On the other hand, I highly agree with you that we all need to take a more active part in our government and what it can and cannot do.Firstly Danny, let me thank YOU greatly, for sharing your insights, understanding and opinions herein!!!I am most appreciative :O)As for your surmise of that which I wrote, YES!!! You are correct, that is for the most part what I was writing, and why, in OUR world, or present, I beleive that although government may be "supposed" to be an acting body on behalf of the people, they in TRUTH, are NOT.......it is why I beleive, that government in fact, has failed in its role and more over, is NOT the means by which we should be seeking authority in the how's, why's and ways of living.........it is why I believe strongly that EVERY SINGLE INDIVIDUAL should check out individuals of vision and truth such as Jacques Fresco and his "Future by Design" research, he is BRILLIANT, and as I suspect, has and shall continue to come up against the same scrutiny as visionaries before him, like Einstein, Edison, Newton, Galileo, Aristotle, and the like, whom today we glorify, yet, were in their day, tortured, teased, and otherwise, dealt a rough hand, from the public......'tis very difficult to enlighten those who have been brainwashed through centuries of prepared and processed truths, fed to them for every single meal by those deemed to be authority figures, whether in government or religious institutions, each with THEIR OWN Personal mandate, and usually not a "morally loving" one for the benefit of ALL, but for their own personal gain.There ARE Alternatives, for US, NOW, in THIS World we are currently residing within.As for laws of moral standing, anything outside of that which is black and white, known to all and accepted by all, is always going to be of one individual's opinion, belief system or moral code.....We ALL KNOW Intrinsically, when we feel good and when we feel bad, we all know what it is to do unto self as opposed to doing unto others.....people should be free to BE the individual they are, so long as no harm is coming to themselves or any others.We have allowed the processed consumption of laws, codes, beliefs etc.. to become so convoluted that we have forgotten the very simplicity by which we can ALL live our lives, in peacefull serenity.......do unto others, as you would have done unto youact in love, through love and of love with your self and all othersdo we need to get so nitty gritty in detailed disgust, if the "laws", the moral conduct expected of all, were these two simple lines?do they not take care of all?and yet, we go into the nitty gritty, make sure everyone is aware of just how disgusting a person can actually be, reinforce that these are actions that CAN be taken, so watch out, instead of focussing our education, entertainment, food, work, lives, around that which is positive.....could you imagine sending your kids to a school that taught them cooperation instead of competition, to look within self for that which inspires instead of that which shall generate the greatest income?and let's not even get into the entertainment industry, where every second program produced is promoting blood, guts, guns, sexual harrassment, and so very much worse......what if all we were entertained by, was positive? comedic? loving?what if what was avialble to us, to inspire our brains, and feed our minds, was of a positive nature?and pls. do not say impossible, ALL is of CHOICE!"Utopian" is not fantasy, it is merely another term processed and convoluted by those with the power to so do, {because we have given it to them for centuries, out of FEAR, as opposed to TRUTH and LOVE}, to deter ALL from the TRUTH of whom we are and how life is TRUEly supposed to BE.........if we have the potential to blow up the entire earth, if we have the technology, the know how, the intellect, to destroy on such vast levels, do we not have the same skills and tools available to us for the exact opposite???why not drop some FLOWER bombs around the world, or paper hearts, with beautiful messages?why CHOOSE to spend OUR monies to destroy, instead of build, and bridge?You are COMPLETELY correct in your statement, "i don't see how you can create ANY law without somebody being able to point to a particular religious group ......."hence why some would deem me, "anarchist".......I neither believe in religion nor government bodies........I do, on the other hand, beleive in WE, and the power that WE contain to make CHANGE, as we HAVE demonstrated so vibrantly so many times in the past.......We need to change our focus, our perceptual realities, and start looking to examples of that which has brought us together not torn us apart.We are ONE, regardless of geographic location and we must start looking at ALL as one, instead of fighting one another for the miniscule parts that ultimately, as we have seen, lead to nothing but DESTRUCTION of the whole :O(Thanks again for your commentary, I do greatly appreciate, and send positive energies my lengthly diatribe did not cause burning or watering eyes :O) hee heeBlessedly BEroni
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.