The implication of your statement "See, religion does moderate one's behaviour" was that you would not have chosen to "do unto others..." if not for your religion.
Quote:
|
Religion has a checkered history--but it's only fair to recognize that it's done a lot of good as well as a lot of not-so-good things. In all probability that means that religion is in and of itself basically neutral,
|
I strongly disagree with the emphasized portion of that statement. While there are certainly cases of good deeds being done in the name of religion, on the whole religion has been responsible for a huge amount of unspeakable evil. I wouldn't go so far to say that relgion is
entirely bad, but for sure it is on the negative end of the spectrum, hardly neutral.
Quote:
|
what's wrong with allowing for a plurality of beliefs anyway?
|
That, as it turns out, was one of the key themes in the NOVA documentary that spawned this thread (if you haven't already, take the time to watch it, as it's quite fascinating). The creationism/ID proponents in Dover, PA, weren't arguing to eliminate evolution from the science curriculum, only to also teach a plurality of beliefs alongside Darwinism. "Why shouldn't both views be taught?" was their claim.