Do we prevent somebody being hurt by superstition or faith by rejecting and challenging those things? 

Is it mistaken to support organised religion in membership or donations?

If people do good because they are human, not because God prompts them then is it right to risk giving God any credit when they alone own their good?

Patrick H


Discrimination happens when you want to and think you need to treat another as less than equal or even as a mere thing. It is  aiming to protect yourself and others in your group by denying rights and privileges to certain persons or people.


It is argued that just discrimination laws discriminate against behaviours or what people do not the people. Catholics plotting to force their religion on you are discriminated against. Business people are not allowed to promise you a wage and pay nothing. Marriage laws discriminate against gay sex acts, polygamist sex acts, and incestuous acts. Adulterous sex is not honoured the same as that between man and wife not even by the law. None of this is said to be discrimination against people as such but against how they act.

Suffering in empathy with your people can cause you to try to harm and kill those who you perceive as persecuting them.  If you can try to put yourself in the victim – be the victims mind - it is hard to be cruel to them. But because you cannot do this with everybody you will not do it with those perceived as enemies or oppressors. Religion is us and not them in some form or another so it is intrinsically inconsistent with treating all people the same.


Discrimination is based on fear.  Those who enable discrimination or act as if you cannot be given equal rights to them may see  you as a threat to them or their family.  They may say it is about keeping jobs free for their children and their friend's children.  It may be a fear that the stranger is going to threaten society's freedoms.  They can be blind to the discrimination for they see it as based on good intention.  But the good intention comes from fear not fact so it does not alter the fact that it is as much discrimination as outright hate would lead to.


Discrimination, treating somebody as an inferior or a group as inferior, cannot happen unless some form of exclusion takes place first.  Exclusion is the sea that discrimination swims in.

Exclusion takes a number of forms.

One is driving the other away by abuse or violence.


Two is letting the other be in your community but given an inferior status.  The other is in but not really of your community.


Three is by ignoring and abandoning them.


Four is very subtle – it is trying to swallow the other up so that there are no differences left. Catholic ecumenism takes that form for it hopes to get the Protectant Churches to join the Catholic Church.


Religion is about superior beings such as gods or God or angels or whatever.  The human person no matter how good is seen as inferior and less worthy of rights as the god etc.  The person is degraded by being seen as a sub-god.  It is really another way of degrading people.  Calling them sub-human is another.  Is it any wonder when able a religion does start treating some people as less human than others??


Religion gives us something extra to discriminate over. It gives us excuses. We have language, race, country and all those things to get an excuse for discriminating over and religion gives us an extra one. Evidently their God likes us having this extra excuse and so must be pro-discrimination!


As Mill told us, if a majority of people in a nation who think much the same way in big matters are too powerful then minorities are left with fewer means of doing something about it. The oppression can take the form of a religion having too much control over schools and the media and hospitals like what happened in Ireland. Or it may take the form of outright hate and attempts to liquidate the minorities. A social oppressor is worse than a state one. It as Mill says “leaves fewer means of escape, penetrating much more deeply into the details of life.”  The hate and the intrusions can be subtle.


The religious label is applied to people by society without much regard to whether it is appropriate or not.  If religion is good then nobody should be given a religious label unless they willingly earn it.  But that is not what happens.  Mafia hitmen are considered devout Catholics for using the Catholic trappings and being raised Catholic.  The label is the major element in discrimination and exclusion for it refuses to see a person as an individual and some label with social and religious and political trappings is imposed on them.  The label is discrimination in itself!  And it leads to other forms of discrimination.
A Church may hate and boycott Jews and base it on the gospel of John chapter 5. A Church may reject black members because of Genesis 4:14. Some say they have a right to their beliefs as long as they are not forcing them on anybody else. They would say that this right should be legally permitted and accepted. If the state interferes, they may get rebellious and more entrenched in their bigotry. It is even argued that they are not discriminating against Jews or black people for no Jew or black person would want to have anything to do with them anyway. This argument is weak. Women wanted to be Catholics and Muslims despite the treatment meted out to them by those religions. You do not argue, "The shop down the road will not employ black people. This is not discrimination because what black person would want to work there?"
Would you be a decent person and be a member or leader of those Churches? To say yes is really to say ,"If you discriminate in any non-religious capacity you are not decent. But as long as you do it for religion you are". That would be foolishness. You would not be considered decent if you had the option of working for a good employer and a racist one and you go and work for the racist one. Being the shop assistant would be bad enough but you are deeper in the mess if you are a supervisor or manager.
A religion worthy of the name or sincere will make members marry only inside itself, have friends who adhere to it loyally and devotedly and employ only those who belong to it.
Such association reduces the religionist’s hatred for what he considers to be their errors and makes it harder for him or her to want to convert them. It contradicts the fact that if God exists and is love then he comes first.
A Catechism of Christian Doctrine (CTS, London, 1978) used to say that marriages between Catholics and other religions were dangerous and only tolerated for grave reasons (Question 310). The present version still says that the Church does not encourage mixed marriages and has dropped the insulting bit. Sometimes, Catholics will say that they are also opposed to mixed marriages because the partners being of two different religions makes things difficult. That is a denial that marriage is a sacrament – a means of grace and that marriage is difficult anyway which is why it needs to be a sacrament.
Catholics will believe that if the partner who is not a Catholic will not convert it is because he is not examining the Catholic faith properly nor is he allowing God to work in him so he is a mortal sinner. The Church claims to be the truth just as Christ was the truth and anybody then who doesn't see the truth is not concerned enough about it and so is a sinner. The Church expresses its view by describing people who are not under the papal regime as non-Catholics. You don't speak of the world apart from Buddhist as non-Buddhist unless you think that everybody should be Buddhist but is not. And so the Church speaks of non-Catholics meaning that anybody who is not a Catholic is defective or falling short in some way.
Roman Catholicism says it cannot let a person who is suspected of mortal sin marry in that state for it defiles the sacrament. Also, when you reject God you reject all goodness – and the love of God and of neighbour go together in religion - and so you cannot really intend to do the good thing of forming a union of holiness or love with your partner. The marriages of sinners are invalid. This shows that probably all marriages can be annulled.
A consistent religion cannot allow mixed marriages at all for the partner of a different religion who makes no attempt to convert you is betraying and sinning against her or his own belief or religion.
If the unbelieving partner refuses to try and convert his Roman Catholic wife or gives us, he is refusing to let her see what he believes to be the truth. This would be mortal sin and not love and love is supposed to be the basis of marriage. Mixed marriages cannot be countenanced by the true Catholic under any circumstances.
Christian marriage is made for the sake of God. God binds the pair together. It is not binding at all if God does not do this. The law cannot really marry you. God can’t bind in sinful marriage.
Rome lets good Catholics marry heretical Catholics which is not fair when it discourages marriage with Protestants.
Rome allows divorce if you are baptised and your husband or wife is not. Though the marriage was real, the Church can dissolve it and allow you to marry again. This rule will wreak havoc in the future for there will be more unbaptised people marrying Catholics than there are currently.
If mixed marriages are bad then it is obviously a sin to be good friends with anybody who does not belong to your religion. It is taking the risk of having your faith corrupted and when faith is of supreme importance in religion it is wrong to take a step closer to parting with it. Moreover, it would be equally bad to associate with anybody who claims to be a member of your religion who denies something it teaches or who refuses to obey it as far as possible. It is easier to commit sin when you are used to sinners and like them. Your friends are supposed to lead you to higher spiritual union with God in faith and service so they have to be from your own religion and determined to stay in and maintain that religion.
If you should not marry a person who doesn't have the same faith as you or who doesn't take it seriously if they do, then how can it be wrong if you refuse to employ them for that reason? Marrying is a bigger thing than hiring.
Catholic priests expect all Catholics to take their faith as seriously as possible. They don't respect a couple - one Protestant and one Catholic - who say religion won't be a problem in their household if they wed for they don't bother with going to Church. That couple, in the arrogance of the clergy, will be treated as if they do take their faith seriously.
The law can in theory make a law forbidding anything that is wrong. Different countries have different rules about what is forbidden. Religion claims the right to discriminate in marriage. If it has that right, what is to stop any country from concluding that it has the right to permit discrimination in anything on religious grounds? Should a country forbid you to reject an application from somebody who is not of your faith when it lets religion encourage discrimination on marriage grounds?
A religion cannot agree with its members employing people of other religions when they could employ members of their own instead. It is giving another religion money to do harm to its faith and strength in return. If they are too well treated they will not look into God’s ways and see the seriousness of being wrong. Since faith is the supreme quality in a religion, the rights of a person who has faith must come before a person who has not got it unless one has to die and it can’t be the latter for he or she will go to Hell.
Jesus said that the greatest commandment of the Law of God was to love God entirely and first of all. He said then that you must love your neighbour as yourself and that this is the second greatest commandment. So looking after yourself and others is not as important as looking after God. He said religion comes first. It follows that a Christian should avoid giving a job to an atheist when there is a Christian candidate A Catholic must not employ a Hindu when he could employ a Catholic who is as good as the Hindu at the job or nearly as good. And so on. Such discrimination then must be lawful.
If you are forced to employ say an Atheist for there are no members of your own religion that you can find that are able to do the job, then you must fire the Atheist if you find one.
Jesus said that if somebody gives you a cup of water because you serve him that person will not lose his reward. He said nothing about rewarding a person who helps those who do not serve Jesus. You may say that Jesus said that if you don't clothe the naked and feed the hungry and do good works for them you don't do it for him. Read the Bible. He said that if you neglected to do these things for his brethren you failed to do them for him. So the teaching is only applicable to Christians. Jesus never taught that you must treat a non-believer the same as a Christian - when you could choose one person or the other give the benefit to the believer. That was his thinking.
However, if Jesus and the Church were logical they would teach that you never ever employ a Hindu or Atheist for example. If you can't get a banker but a Jewish banker, then do without the banker if your religion and God come first and to support a member of another religion is to support a campaigner or at least a worker against your faith. Jesus said that whoever was not for him was against him.
Roman Catholicism requires that gay people be barred from certain vocations such as teaching. It forbids pharmacists to dispense the morning after pill to rape victims. Catholics who run pharmacies are expected to reject employees they cannot trust to conform to Church teaching.
If you are to love God most of all, it follows then that you are to hate sin for it is against him. If we are all sinners as Christianity says, then it follows that we are to love the sinner and hate the sin. If the person is not deliberately or knowingly doing evil, they are still doing evil and what they do must be hated as much as a sin is. If you love the person but hate the evil then you must have the right to discriminate against employing a person who is not living as your God requires. It is the evil you discriminate against and not them. This may be hypocrisy but it is Christian doctrine and so we point the finger and accuse that faith of being pro-discrimination. Christians who deny that it is pro-discrimination are simply ignorant. They are still supporting something bad.
The nonsensical morality of the Church is pro-discrimination. For example, a woman who refuses to save her dying son by donating a kidney is admired for making her own choice and if she has an abortion she is an evil godless monster. With a ludicrous morality like that, you will not be terribly convinced that discrimination is wrong. You will feel that it is wrong for anybody to discriminate against you for your faith but you will hold that it is not wrong for you to do likewise for your faith is right and theirs is wrong.
Religious people discriminate against holders of different religious beliefs as bizarre as their own. The Catholic believes the bread and wine of Mass are really the body and blood of Jesus. If you believed that the door knob was really your dead father you would be considered mad and possibly dangerous. Religion is intrinsically bigoted and in search of special social privileges.
From what has been said, it is clear that even religions which do not discriminate lead to it. They don’t have to preach it when things will take their course in the way they want. Religion and suffering and bloodshed and division tend to go together.
Atheists have no fear of being friends with or marrying religionists for we have the knowledge of the truth.
A Critical Review of Humanist Manifestos 1 & 2, Homer Duncan MC, International Publications, Lubbock Texas.
A Shattered Visage The Real Face of Atheism, Ravi Zacharias, Wolgemuth & Hyatt, Tennessee, 1990
A Thief in the Night, John Cornwell, Penguin, London, 1990
A Woman Rides the Beast, Dave Hunt, Harvest House, Eugene, Oregon, 1994
All Roads Lead to Rome, Michael de Semlyen, Dorchester House Publications, Bucks, 1993 (page 120 recounts Cardinal Konig of Vienna’s testimony that the Vatican helped Nazi war criminals to escape)
Apologetics and Catholic Doctrine, Part 1, Most Rev M Sheehan DD, M H Gill & Son, Dublin 1954
Apologetics for the Pulpit, Aloysius Roche Burns Oates & Washbourne Ltd, London, 1950
Blind Alley Beliefs, David Cook, Pickering & Inglis, Glasgow, 1979
Catholicism and Fundamentalism, Karl Keating, Ignatius Press, San Francisco, 1988
Christianity, David Albert Jones, OP, Family Publications, Oxford, 1999
Convert or Die, Edmond Paris, Chick Publications, Chino, California, undated
Correction and Discipline of Children, John R Rice, Sword of the Lord, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, 1946
Crisis of Moral Authority, Don Cupitt, SCM Press, London, 1985
Documents of the Christian Church, edited by Henry Bettenson, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1979
Does America Need the Moral Majority? William Willoughby, Haven Books, New Jersey, 1981
Does Conscience Decide? Bishop William J Philbin, Catholic Truth Society of Ireland, Dublin
Ecumenical Jihad, Peter Kreeft, Ignatius Press, San Francisco, 1996
European Union and Roman Catholic Influence In Britain, David N Samuel, The Harrison Trust, Kent, 1995
Fascism in the English Church, A London Journalist, Henry E Walter, London, 1938
Fifty Years in the “Church” of Rome, Charles Chiniquy, Chick Publications, Chino, California, 1985
God and the Gun, The Church and Irish Terrorism, Martin Dillon, Orion, London, 1998
God Is Not Great, The Case Against Religion, Christopher Hitchens, Atlantic Books, London, 2007
‘God, That’s not fair!’ Dick Dowsett, OMF Books, Overseas Missionary Fellowship, Belmont, The Vine, Sevenoaks, Kent TN13 3TZ] Kent, 1982
Handbook of Christian Apologetics, Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli, Monarch, East Sussex, 1995
Human Rights, Michael Bertram Crowe Veritas, Dublin, 1978
In God’s Name, David Yallop, Corgi, London, 1987
Is the Roman Catholic Church a Secret Society? John V Simcox, Warren Sandell and Raymond Winch Watts & Co London, 1946
Is There Salvation Outside The Catholic Church? Fr J Bainvel SJ, TAN, Illinois, 1979
Jesuit Plots, From Elizabethan to Modern Times, Albert Close, Protestant Truth Society, London undated
Jesus the Only Saviour, Tony and Patricia Higton, Monarch Tunbridge Wells, Kent, 1993
New Catholic Encyclopedia, The Catholic University of America and the McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., Washington, District of Columbia, 1967
Radio Replies, Vol 1, Frs Rumble and Carty, Radio Replies Press, St Paul, Minnesota, 1938
Radio Replies, Vol 2, Frs Rumble and Carty, Radio Replies Press, St Paul, Minnesota 1940
Radio Replies, Vol 3, Frs Rumble and Carty, Radio Replies Press, St Paul, Minnesota 1942
Religious Freedom, A Fundamental Right, Michael Swhwartz, Liguori Publications, Missouri, 1987
Roman Catholicism, Loraine Boettner, Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, Phillipsburg, New Jersey, 1987
Rome – Our Enemy, Clifford Smyth, Puritan Printing, Belfast, 1975
Secular Humanism – The Most Dangerous Religion in America, Homer Duncan, MC International Publications, Lubbock, Texas. Undated.
Sex Education in Our Public Schools, Jack Hyles, Sword of the Lord, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, 1969
Sex, Dissidence and Damnation, Jeffrey Richards, Routledge, London 1994
Spy in the Vatican 1941-45, Branko Bokun, Tom Stacey Books, London, 1973
Summa Theologica of St Thomas Aquinas, Part II, Second Number, Thomas Baker, London, 1918.
The Christian and War, Robert Moyer, Sword of the Lord, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, 1946
The Church of Rome, Wilson Ewin, Bible Baptist Church, Nashua NH USA
The Encyclopaedia of Heresies and Heretics, Leonard George, Robson Books, London, 1995
The Inquisition of the Middle Ages, Henry Charles Lea, Citadel, New York, 1963
The Last Temptation of Christ, Its Deception and What you Should Do About it, Erwin T Lutzer, Moody Press, Chicago, 1988
The Pestilence of AIDS, Hugh Pyle, Sword of the Lord, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, 1987
The Rise of the Spanish Inquisition, Jean Plaidy, Star, London, 1978
The Sacred Executioner Human Sacrifice and the Legacy of Guilt Hyam Maccoby Thames and Hudson, London, 1982
The Secret History of the Jesuits, Edmond Paris, Chick Publications, Chino, California, 1975
The Truth About the Homosexuals, Dr Hugh F Pyle, Sword of the Lord, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, 1978
The Truth that Leads to Eternal Life, Watchtower, New York, 1968
The Unequal Yoke, John R Rice, Sword of the Lord, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, 1946
The Upside-Down Kingdom, Donald B Kraybill Marshalls, Hants, 1978
The Vatican Connection, The Explosive Expose of a Billion-Dollar Counterfeit Stock Deal Between the Mafia the Church, Richard Hammers Penguin, Middlesex, 1982
Their Kingdom Come, Robert Hutchison, Corgi, London, 1997
Unholy Sacrifices of the New Age, Paul de Parrie and Mary Pride, Crossway Books, Westchester, Illinois 1988
Vatican USA, Nino LoBello, Trident Press, New York, 1972
Vicars of Christ, Peter de Rosa, Corgi Books, London, 1993
Walking with Unbelievers, Michael Paul Gallagher SJ, Veritas Dublin 1985
War and Politics The Christian’s Duty, Peter Watkins, Christadelphian Bible Mission, Birmingham
What About Those Who Have Never Heard? Radio Bible Class, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1986
Whatever Happened to Heaven? Dave Hunt, Harvest House, Publishers, Oregon, 1988

Fascist Romanism Defies Civilisation by Joseph McCabe
Democracy is not a good form of Government by Citizens for the Ten Commandments
Is Christianity a Cult?