Quote:
Originally Posted by PepsiFree
Huh? You're now suggesting collective atonement, described as "taking action to correct a previous wrong doing," is not morally good? Or are you saying that none of this actually qualifies as collective atonement, even though that's what you described it as?
Sorry, nobody is arguing about the historical influence of religion in morality, even though that's the conversation you want to have. The argument is that, perhaps because of the influence, you no longer need to be religious or follow God to have a moral compass. I'm not sure why that needs repeating, it's been said several times...
|
Taking concrete measures to measurably improve peoples’ lives = good in the utilitarian sense.
Making collective expressions of guilt and atonement = good in the religious sense.
I favour the former. The latter is mainly about demonstrating the moral virtue of the people carrying out the rituals. That’s true whether it’s performed in a church or on twitter.