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?

 


SOME THINGS CHRISTIANS ARE HYPOCRITES ABOUT
 
CHRISTIANS: If we annul a marriage, we don't declare the children of that marriage to be illegitimate
 
SANITY SAYS:
Illegitimate means that the babies should not have been born - or more accurately, they should not have been conceived in the first place. If the marriage was not real and it is true that real marriage is the only rightful context for having children then the children of an annulled marriage are illegitimate. You are avoiding admitting your true beliefs.
 
The claim that illegitimate simply means that the father is unknown is a blatant lie. It denies the meaning of the word illegitimate.
 
The annulment process in the Catholic Church in particular is really divorce for it regards a marriage as fake if anybody coerced the bride or groom. But the Bible God himself has laid down laws allowing and approving enforced marriage. A man could be forced to marry his sister in law or a woman he raped. The laws nevertheless show more enthusiasm for forcing women into marriage than men.
 
Catholics complain about people redefining marriage, but they have done that themselves by emphasising that you need to be free to contract a marriage which contradicts the Bible. They define marriage as a contract before God freely entered into by a man and woman for life that is open to procreation.
 
CHRISTIANS: It is okay to have a relationship with a married person awaiting annulment and to pray that the marriage will be annulled
 
SANITY SAYS:
If sex outside marriage is bad, it is bad to have such sex even if you only imagine you are married. It would be wrong to wish that anybody committed this sin.
 
CHRISTIANS: Converts should make a commitment to the gospel for life. Baptism is for expressing that commitment. The union made by God and the recipient can be symbolised by marriage but it is far closer and more important than that.
 
SANITY SAYS:
In other words, don't change your mind. Don't be open to evidence that disproves your faith or religion.
 
And if they really believe the marriage stuff, why do they baptise babies and children?

CHRISTIANS:
God made marriage indissoluble to protect marriage and the family
 
SANITY SAYS:
Correction: You believe that God only makes marriages between Christians to be indissoluble. You hold that marriages between unbaptised people though real can be dissolved. Nice to know that their families are not important.
 
CHRISTIANS:
Marriage between two baptised persons is for life and no power can end that marriage but death. Divorce may try but it doesn't work
 
SANITY SAYS:
So that marriage is to be protected and respected far more than any other kind of marriage just because the pair were initiated into Christianity and experienced a ritual that may mean nothing to them any more.
 
You Catholics believe that only marriages involving two baptised people cannot be broken and are indissoluble until death. You teach that a marriage between a baptised person and a non-baptised may be divorced. You are saying then that sex in those marriages is not saying, "Let us be married forever and never separated."

CHRISTIANS:
Cancer (for example) patients may take morphine though it makes them high and demeans their free will by putting them outside of their right minds
 
SANITY SAYS:
Morphine changes the natural workings of the mind. Your morality says that taking drugs or too much drink is degrading for it is fighting your nature and yet you allow it in this case though you say that human dignity and human wholeness is more important that avoiding pain. You say the dying process is the most important part of life for you have to use it to prepare for heaven or hell and you allow this distortion of mental faculties! If you repent then and prepare for heaven how do you know that it is you preparing and not the drugs?
 
CHRISTIANS:
You may say a sick or dying person, "Everything is going to be all right. Don't be scared."
 
SANITY SAYS:
That is the sin of presuming that God won't let them suffer any more. It is okay on the spiritual level to say that if there is no God. But if there is it insults him who comes first. Belief in God is not concerned with human welfare though spin-doctors try to tell you different.
 
CHRISTIANS:
Don't accept X into your charity to collect money for he or she defrauded others some years ago.

 

SANITY SAYS:
They are saying it is probable that that person will steal again.

CHRISTIANS: Punishment if possible should seek to deter sinners.
 
SANITY SAYS: If sin has bad results and punishments attached to it, then if you really care about the sinner you will tell her or him that he or she is doing wrong and sinning.
 
Surely one consequence of sinning is that you invite people to judge and criticise and dislike and disapprove of you? What sense does it make you say that you invite damage and pain through sin if getting judged is not one of the bad consequences? Surely if you sin you ask for judgement even if you don't want it? If you should not judge a person in any sense, even if you know they are sinful, then it makes no sense to talk about sin.
 
Sin means doing wrong that deserves judgement from God and those who are God's servants.
 
If you seek to protect sinners from even fair judgement, then why not drop the idea of sin altogether? You are enabling the sinners to keep sinning. Sinners hate being judged more than any other bad result of their sin.


It is natural to judge so if you suppress this instinct for religious political correctness, you prove yourself to be a hypocrite who facilitates sin while saying that sin is very bad and to be avoided.
 
CHRISTIANS:
God lets people suffer for a reason

SANITY SAYS:
What gives you the right to say that when others suffer more than you ever could? How dare you say that people should be used by your God as means not as ends? How dare you manipulate people into being comforted by your lies? How dare you when you cannot prove that there is a God? To mention your belief in God is to teach that he lets people suffer for a reason and that is vile.
 
CHRISTIANS:
Those who reject a relationship with Christ through unbelief or sin such as adultery or heresy or homosexuality will go to Hell at death and they will never be free from its torments

SANITY SAYS:
Nobody has the right to suggest anybody could be bad enough to choose such a fate or that anybody deserves to have such a fate. You need very strong proof before you can say a thing like that. Evil Christians will see in this doctrine an encouragement for them to maltreat others. The child may be so scared of eternal damnation that she or he may decide that it is best to be amoral and have no moral beliefs so that God may not damn her or him forever in Hell. God cannot put you in Hell unless you know what you are choosing.
 
You terrorize innocent children by making them feel or believe or both that they may go to Hell forever if they die. You give people a reason to be amoral. It is better to do harm on earth for there is only so much harm you can do over amoral beliefs than to believe and harm yourself by getting God to dump you in Hell forever.
 
Even if you don't terrorize then you should. You have to terrorize people to get them out of a burning building which is less danger than Hell. You have to assume everybody is in grave danger because it is better for everybody on earth to have a life of misery than for so much as one person to have an eternity of misery.
 
CHRISTIANS:

Religion has no room for violence
 
SANITY SAYS:

Your Bible is full of it. Doesn't Leviticus report God commanding that certain sinners be put to death? Didn't Jesus refuse to hide from arrest though he knew he was going to end up executed? Didn't he riot in the Temple? A secularist does not kill for what he or she believes in but religion often does. The secularist who persecutes is merely showing his or her lack of belief in secularism. If you know you are right and that people should be put before beliefs which is the essence of secularism you will not feel so insecure that you will feel the need for force. Accordingly you will not need to push it on people any more than anybody needs to push the idea that 1 + 1 = 2.

The word religion comes from the word to bind. Religion obligates or binds you to believe and do certain things. Secularism, secularism seeks only what is best for people without considering God, does not bind but inspires. Binding is an act of violence.
 
The religious person can never be secular for that implies that God is somehow a bad thing. Some religions may say they believe in the separation of Church and state. That is not secularist. It is merely an expression of the belief that God wants us to rule us his own way. In fact, they only advance separation for they think God desires it. But nevertheless they teach that if God's law and man's conflict God must be obeyed.
 
CHRISTIANS: God allows us to have paid ministries
 
SANITY SAYS:

With all the false religions about, with the duty to help others be good without charge, God is simply wrong or being demeaned yet again in the interests of the Church
 
CHRISTIANS:

Slander is wrong
 
SANITY SAYS:

And you feel you can accuse sinners of being bad enough to choose Hell or you can say that God puts them there for they deserve eternal torment. You need absolute proof of Hell before you can say things like that and you plod on without it and slander your God in the process for letting people suffer that fate
 
CHRISTIANS:

Going to healing shrines approved by the Church is good
 
SANITY SAYS:

If you trusted God, you would merely ask him to heal you and you wouldn't need to make a big thing of your prayer by expressing it on a pilgrimage. Instead you would devote the pilgrimage to praying for somebody else. To go on a pilgrimage and be frequently praying for healing just indicates that you think that if you keep nagging at God he will help for he is a rogue. You aren't so keen on praying all the time to be a saint and a hero of God as you are to get material health so if you get a healing then it wasn't God who gave it to you.

CHRISTIANS:

Evil thoughts and feelings are wrong and sinful if deliberately indulged in. Jesus said it was a sin to look with desire at a woman you were not married to
 
SANITY SAYS:

You are silent while actresses and actors kiss and rouse feelings of hatred and aggression to do their jobs. What about films that make children wish that there really was magic? Don't you say that magic blasphemes the doctrine that God is who is in control? You don't make as many restrictions as you think you should for you seek to exploit the people and you like admiration.
 
CHRISTIANS:

God punished Jesus in our place for our sins so that he could forgive us


SANITY SAYS:

And you praise him for that though it was not fair. If God thinks he is punishing our sins by taking it out on an innocent man then he is not really forgiving us at all. He is doing wrong himself by tormenting Jesus.  It is an insult to Jesus how Christians say he died for sins when in fact they pretend to take those sins seriously.  Their teaching of love the sinner and hate the sin means pretend the sinner and the sin are separate when they are plainly not.  The sinner is the problem and the sin cannot exist without the sinner.  It is the person's bad character that is the problem not what they do - what they do only shows what they are.  No Christian really can love the sinner and hate the sin.  When they say they do they mean they hate the damaging results of the bad action.  The mother loves her son though he is a drug dealer and because he is one but that does not mean she likes the results.  The results can be hated and not the person but the immorality cannot be hated without hating the person.  Love the sinner and hate the sin is actually passive aggressive.
 
CHRISTIANS: Homosexuality is an objective disorder but we are not saying homosexuals are disordered.
 
SANITY SAYS:

The homosexuality example just proves Christian hypocrisy. To say your sexuality is warped is to say you are warped in so far as your sexuality is warped.
 
CHRISTIANS:

We uphold human rights
 
SANITY SAYS:

Human rights are based on needs. We have a right to food for we need it. We have a right to basics. For example, you have a right to water but you do not have a right to chicken curry. The curry is a privilege. Rights are based on justice too. It is only fair that you get the water. But you say that we were conceived and born while God rejected us as sinners. We have no rights at all if we don't have a right to a relationship with this God of yours that is supposed to be so great. You may teach that babies that die rejected by God go to a paradise called Limbo and not the pains of Hell but that is a concession by God. He could send the child to everlasting torment. The only right we have is to burn in Hell. You used to openly admit your dogma that all the things currently referred to as human rights are not human rights but privileges. Now you hide it to sweeten people up.
 
CHRISTIANS:

Jane has to look after her ailing father all by herself for the family won't help her and we feel compassion for her
 
SANITY SAYS:

But if Jane is getting an opportunity to get a reward in Heaven from God how could you sincerely have compassion for her? You lie.
 
CHRISTIANS:

The sacraments are rituals that put God's grace in you
 
SANITY SAYS:

It means we depend on men to do the rites to bring us to God. That is actually worse than holding that the pope not Jesus died for your sins. Then the error is not that somebody didn't die for your sins but that somebody did and you have chosen just the wrong person.  The whole point of somebody dying to save you is that you come to them for salvation. If somebody says, "You cannot get access to that salvation unless you succumb to this ritual I offer", that takes away the whole point. You might as well believe anybody can save you.  Sacramentalism is extreme blasphemy.
 
CHRISTIANS:

The bread and wine become the body and blood of Jesus Christ. They are not bread and wine any more though they seem to be bread and wine.
 
SANITY SAYS:

The ancients believed that their gods were greater beings than themselves but who were able to somehow become the images they worshipped. They did not think a statue could hear prayer and help them because it was just a statue. If an idol was broken or smashed, they excused this by saying that a greater god allowed it to happen or the god left the image. The Bible ignores such rationalisation and states simply that if it can be damaged it is not a god. The Catholic Church degrades the people by drawing them into idolatry. They adore bread and wine that is not God as proven by the fact that it ends up in the toilet.
 
The Bible denounces idolatry regardless of how happy it makes people because it is better to face the truth than to be happy and deluded.  The Catholic idolatry pretends a change has happened to make bread and wine the body and blood of Jesus. It is therefore worse than pagan idolatry.
 
Idolatry is mistaking what is not divine for divine. Its an intellectual error.
 
It is said that idolatry is also a sign that man wants to ignore God's authority and set up his own version of God and religion. Its a way of going your own way and having a God you can control at least to a degree. It shows traits of dishonesty and hypocrisy and arrogance. What if its a genuine mistake? This form of idolatry is actually a different type from the type where a statue is worshipped. It is really just another word for defiance of God. It is not really idolatry, strictly speaking.
 
It is not necessary to accuse statue worshipping of entailing vice and ill-will. The only real idolatry is adoring something as God when it is not. God says idolatry is evil and to be stamped out - if it is done with the best of intentions that is irrelevant.
  
CHRISTIANS:

You can be made righteous by mere repentance
 
SANITY SAYS:

Catholics say that if you were a robber and a brigand and a whoremonger in the past, it is not hypocritical to repent and condemn those things now.

But reason says that unless you confess these things publicly you cannot engage in any public crusade against them. You must confess you were a homosexual and why you think its wrong and say why you have given it up if you want to cast a vote against gay rights. If you work against evil and perceived evil you must confess if you have done the evils otherwise you are just a hypocrite.

So if we repent that gives us the green light to condemn people doing what we did.

Is that based on the assumption that you are not that person anymore or on the assumption that God has forgiven you or is it both?
 
As God comes first for a Catholic it follows that it is chiefly if not solely because God has forgiven. If God comes first then its the only way to honour him for forgiving.

This is promotion of hypocrisy. Repenting only gives us the green light to condemn evils we committed ourselves prior to repentance if it is focused on the person turning over a new and better leaf. The only way to prove that you would have done differently is by putting you in a time machine to repeat the past. It is easy to tell yourself that if you intend to stop doing evil that if you had the past repeated you would not have done the evil you did.