Re: Going back...

Chuck Warman (cwarman@wf.net)
Fri, 20 Jun 1997 21:23:09 -0500

At 02:07 PM 6/20/97 -0600, Russell Stewart wrote:
>>"Choosing points of the most definitive character, Christianity abolished
(1)
>>gladiatorial shows, and other spectacles of horrid cruelty to men;
>
>And replaced them with the Crusades, witch burnings, and other alternate
>spectacles of horrid cruelty to men (and women).
>
>>(2) human
>>sacrifices;
>
>See witch-burning above.
>
>>(3) polygamy;
>
>Unless you count Mormons.
>
>However, this seems a little out of place. Polygamy certainly is a little
>wierd, and I wouldn't go for it, but it hardly seems like it belongs in a
>list of great human evils.
>
>>(4) exposure of children;
>
>What does this refer to? The fact that Christian Conquistadors forced
>native populations to wear clothes, even though they were perfectly
>comfortable without them? In what way did this help anybody?
>
>>(5) slavery (in its old
>>form, and has nearly accomplished the work in its new);
>
>I am unclear as to how Christianity can claim the bulk of the responsibility
>for abolishing slavery.
>
>>(6) cannibalism.
>
>That's right. All non-Christian cultures have advocated cannibalism.
>
>Give me a break.
>
>>Next,
>>Christianity drove into the shade all unnatural lusts, and, indeed, all
>>irregular passions.
>
>Please define "unnatural lusts" and "irregular passions" and explain what
>is evil about them. From a logical basis, mind you.
>
>>Next,
>>Christianity estalished (1) generally speaking, the moral and social
equality
>>of women;
>
>As does humanist morality.
>
>>(2) the duty of relieving the poor, the sick and the afflicted;
>
>As does humanist morality.
>
>>(3)
>>peace, instead of war, as the ordinary presumptive relation between
nations.
>
>As does liberal philosophy.

Problem is, all the "Christian" evils you cite are based on *distortions*
of the teachings of Jesus, which even a casual reading of the four gospel
books will show. OTOH, materialism has no moral base with which to
condemn evils committed in the name of materialism. No act can "distort"
materialist morality, it can only violate your personal, subjective
"empathy". Indeed, if materialism must rely on a concept as nebulous and
subjective as "empathy" for a moral base, it cannot even define evil an any
universal sense.

Chuck
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Chuck Warman
cwarman@wf.net (Wichita Falls, TX)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
"The abdication of Belief / makes the Behavior small."
----Emily Dickinson