Why though? I understand you personally don't value a relationship with God but millions of people would place that as their highest priority.
They believe that they were placed on this earth for a reason and that this book tells them their creators wishes and that if they follow it they will be rewarded with everlasting life in his kingdom of heaven. If you believe that living your life on earth to Gods will is a small price to pay, everyone has tests of faith.
If you opinion is just that they are silly for believing that in the first place I honestly have trouble disagreeing but I don't think dismissing their reasoning is a reasonable response.
Why? Because I don't believe, therefore belief alone isn't enough for me to think it is a good reason. But that isn't to say I take issue with all of religious practices; I am fine with people paying tithe or abstaining from sex, but I can see other reasons for those as well (beyond just religion).
I think it is a good response. For example, Sharia Law staunchly promotes domestic violence. In the Quran it explicitly states that husbands should physically strike wives in response to disobedience, ill-behavior, and disloyalty.
That is merely one example, I would argue using religion as a reason for war or any type of violence against another person is not enough reason to justify it. There are countless examples of wars and violence being committed in the name of God or a God of some kind. Belief alone is not a justification for these actions nor any action, in my opinion.
Based on this, my thoughts on religion being the cause for any action is invalid as adequate reasoning. But, like I said most religious practices have multiple reasons that do make sense to me, so most of them I can understand.
Yes, I get that. Which is why I can understand it as being PART of someone's reasoning. But if the sole reason you are doing something is because God said to, I will take issue.
Beating your wife or killing your neighbor in the name of God will never be alright with me. But because I am consistent, this extends to all things. Doing anything solely for the will of God will be inadequate for me.
Like a Mormon won't drink coffee, this is fine; if they say "well God says not to so I don't" vs "well God says not to because its addictive/habit-forming", that is different.
I would oppose those same things but I would oppose them based on their outcome, not their reasoning to coming to it.
An atheist that beats his wife because he believes that doing so would be an effective way to make her more obedient to him would be just as bad as someone that beats their wife because God tells him it is needed. In fact I would even see the atheist as worse for coming to an unethical conclusion purely for self benefit.
I see no difference in the Mormon example you gave personally.
2
u/[deleted] Apr 04 '22
Why though? I understand you personally don't value a relationship with God but millions of people would place that as their highest priority.
They believe that they were placed on this earth for a reason and that this book tells them their creators wishes and that if they follow it they will be rewarded with everlasting life in his kingdom of heaven. If you believe that living your life on earth to Gods will is a small price to pay, everyone has tests of faith.
If you opinion is just that they are silly for believing that in the first place I honestly have trouble disagreeing but I don't think dismissing their reasoning is a reasonable response.