Is the Initiation of Force Ever Morally Justified?

[tara]

religions are ok at best, training wheels for noobs, but staunchly religious people or people that make their identity out of being of a religion are hopelessly constipated in life, cause they never grow or learn to observe and think and their heart isn't coming from inner, its coming from it being like a rule. And generally those type of people do many ills, minor things and on large scales...moreso than non religious or more natural spiritual people, because they harbor angst, repressed emotions and stuff, and feel superior and justified. They feel endowed rather than actually being pleasant and fun to be around. Somehow fun gets thrown out to religious people, they live in fear as slaves and yet somehow think they are doing the right thing....its like no man, if you aren't doped and joyous and shed that vibe in life, you're a problem. Its no coincidence kids avoid religion and church and generally don't want to be around those kind of people. They are stiff and non open and fun and are stuck to some random detrimental beliefs or...words. They got a clouded lens, that cant see life, it only sees some hazy thing they have been trained, indoctrinated, out of fear, to try to see. If from birth someone grows up in a nurturing environment...that lets each person totally express themselves individually as whatever they are, and be, and have a pretty good diet, they naturally are an extremely good person...better than most religious people!

Maybe you have met such people. I don't think it is OK to slag off about the majority of the world's population on the basis of you having met some you didn't like. I have certainly met a number of religious people who don't fit your description.

 

[tara]

There would be no gay hatred without religion. It's the power which authorizes people to kill & rape those whom are gay, like what is happening in some parts of Africa & the middle east.

There is no proving or disproving your counterfactual claim.
I am definitely against the vicious hatred inflicted on gays, whoever it comes from. It does not only come from religious people, and is not always justified by religious arguments.

 

[SaltGirl]

religions are ok at best, training wheels for noobs, but staunchly religious people or people that make their identity out of being of a religion are hopelessly constipated in life, cause they never grow or learn to observe and think and their heart isn't coming from inner, its coming from it being like a rule. And generally those type of people do many ills, minor things and on large scales...moreso than non religious or more natural spiritual people, because they harbor angst, repressed emotions and stuff, and feel superior and justified. They feel endowed rather than actually being pleasant and fun to be around. Somehow fun gets thrown out to religious people, they live in fear as slaves and yet somehow think they are doing the right thing....its like no man, if you aren't doped and joyous and shed that vibe in life, you're a problem. Its no coincidence kids avoid religion and church and generally don't want to be around those kind of people. They are stiff and non open and fun and are stuck to some random detrimental beliefs or...words. They got a clouded lens, that cant see life, it only sees some hazy thing they have been trained, indoctrinated, out of fear, to try to see. If from birth someone grows up in a nurturing environment...that lets each person totally express themselves individually as whatever they are, and be, and have a pretty good diet, they naturally are an extremely good person...better than most religious people!

Maybe you have met such people. I don't think it is OK to slag off about the majority of the world's population on the basis of you having met some you didn't like. I have certainly met a number of religious people who don't fit your description.

It is one thing to be religious and another to use religion to justify disgusting actions and behaviour.

Problem comes when even beneficial aspects of religion get turned on their head to justify bigotry. I remember that in Thailand, one of the reason they do not want to allow ka-toi to marry is that they believe there is karmic retribution going on(that they were women in their past lives and were unfaithful to their husband) even when it is a complete misunderstanding of the original karmic principles of Buddhism.

This is also a general problem. Most religions tend to be abused and twisted into justifying one's own bigotry. It usually involves misrepresenting and misinterpreting the religious texts in question or using very selective understanding of the texts.

I have nothing against spirituality(I am technically a non-practicioning Discordianist), but I do believe religions and religious people need to own up to their own problems and shortcomings, just as anyone else really, whether theistic, agnostic, or atheist. I have met some wonderful people of various religious sects, but they all too often get cast in shadow by the people in power.

In other words, John Doe or Jane Doe might be fantastic Christian people who are good to all regardless of religion, gender, race, or sexuality, but sadly it does not change the fact that the Christian people with influence are trying to fight against marriage equality, banning abortions and sex ed. among other things. When you get beaten to death on the streets of Moscow just for being different you will find little sympathy or understanding towards religion and if religious people want to change that(I know some who do) they need to start getting more vocal about that change, or as someone put it:

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.

 

[narouz]

It is predictable that on a website about Ray Peat
there will be a lot of anti-religious sentiment.
Personally, I guess my experience with religious people is mixed.
Maybe in about the same ratio as with people in general.
I've seen instances where religion has deepened people, made them better.
And I've seen those where it has just made people feel more certain and superior.

There was an ironic twist with Peat's experience at Blake College regarding religion.
It would seem, if the books about that bit of history can be trusted,
that some of the seeds of doom for the school were planted
when Peat gave haven to that weird Madeleine something woman--
the famous athiest firebrand.
She was...I can't exactly remember...on the run from the law in the US.
Or on the run in some way,
fled the country,
and Peat gave her a place to stay.
I think he must have been sympathetic with her and her hatred for religion.

As I've noted, my memory is foggy on the details,
but as I recall this Madeleine woman brought with her a boyfriend.
Seems like he was CIA or in cahoots with the CIA.
And also the Madeleine woman was power hungry and scheming.
I think maybe one of her sons was with her and he was that way too...?
But I think the Madeleine woman schemed to take control of the school.
And her weird CIA-cahooting boyfriend also sought to undermine the school,
falsely reporting drug use stories.

So it was the fiercely anti-religious woman who Peat took into his trust
that led, at least in part if not in the main, to his school's undoing.
That's one irony.

The other one is that Peat turned to a nearby Mexican Catholic church priest for help
when all this was going on.
And that priest helped get rid of Madeleine and the evil CIA-cahooting boyfriend.

I'm sure I got some of the details wrong in the tale,
but I think the general contours are correct.

 

[tara]

@SaltGirl, I agree.
And oppressive regimes all through history have twisted and misused religions to maintain and extend their own power, from witch hunts to crusades to colonial takeovers to contemporary military engagements, etc.

There are also some religious organisations that do work in a basically good direction too, although they aren't generally the dominant strands (at least at the moment).

 

[narouz]

Madalyn Murray O'Hair is the name of the (devil) woman
I was trying to think of in my previous post.
The atheist who was the Seed of Doom for Blake College.

(BTW, I'm not religious. Agnostic, I guess.)

 

[DaveFoster]

The principle of non-aggression is often quoted alongside the principle of reciprocity, (or the Golden Rule if you're into that.) In the context of justification, it's far better to view things from a biological standpoint, as humans will justify anything that suits their own needs at that time.

If I'm rich, I will desire a regressive tax or no tax. Why? I am a competitor, and I know it. It helps my competitive kids survive.

If I'm poor, I will desire a progressive tax or socialist economy. Why? I am a parasite, even if I don't want to admit it. It helps my parasitical kids survive.

If I'm a criminal, I will desire a very easy legal system. Why? I am a predator, and I like it. It helps my predatory kids survive

If I'm a religious, I will desire a very socially conservative lawbook. Why? I thrive on tradition, and it's the moral high ground. It helps my pious kids survive.

 

[Such_Saturation]

Yeah and if I'm feeling gloomy, I will desire a materialistic outlook. Why? Because that's where I'm at right now. It's a defensive mechanism.

 

[DaveFoster]

Yeah and if I'm feeling gloomy, I will desire a materialistic outlook. Why? Because that's where I'm at right now. It's a defensive mechanism.

I'm sorry that you're gloomy. You should try some materialism; it's good stuff. It has some real benefits.

 

[Such_Saturation]

Such as increased suicide rate

 

[goodandevil]

I heard ayn rand was writing a story about a rothschild, that js, as the protagonist. I say gkd gave us anger, and if we kniw ourselves completely, we should allow ourselves complete expression. Few seek to really understand themselves, they deny that tbey supress emotions and needs, thjs thjs huge mess we're in. We are meant to embrace our humanity.

 

[pboy]

if someone is right up in your grill or personal space and theyre offensive, then you are allowed to lay down the law. Otherwise no, never justified

and usually no one ever does this, unless you actually deserve it, so in a sense...unless you are like still young and aren't able to create your own life, or are living in an oppressive place where youre kind of trapped, there shouldn't ever need to be a reason to use force. I consider force not just physical but also verbal or passive aggressive means of 'getting back' or whatever at the other person. Theres a huge difference between genuine deservance of someone laying down the law (aka knocking your **** to the floor) upon another person, and what more commonly happens...someones inner world, due to their own construct and current state, most notably constipation and prejudice, in which case they take out their ***t on other people when its really their own fault for the way they feel, and their outbursts are actually just adding to their load of guilt and problems
and exposing the lack of soul integrity/quality they have, and they looking like an ****


btw...ayn rand is incredibly hot, she must know what shes talking about, thank you narouz for gracing us with her pictures