I was born in a house that was very religious, our everyday life was largely influence by the teaching of religion. So naturally myself worst was deeply rooted in the Christian way of life. But all this change when I got older and got exposed to other way of thinking, and started to have debate with my father about religion and the bias people have when it comes to living a good life. I believe people can live a moral life and achieve morality without out being religious. When it comes to debate about organized religion there are many resisted subjects on religion and morality.
So people like I that believed that a man or a woman can obtain morality can maintained it without religion. I believe this is possible because we live in a new age …show more content…
Dad and many devoted believers like himself, have a belief that we need religion to function as a people. He sometimes tell me that people religious belief no matter what religion they might believe in are the essential part of our civilization for from the beginning of time. He tells me that atheist don’t lead to nothing and atheism don’t promise me nothing but a worthless life followed by death. Paradoxically he have a belief that religion is also the example of free speech. He also argue that religion no matter what kind it may be is a force for good. Without religion we will not have all the good things we have now, like missionary work and no ethics to live a good and meaningful life by. Sadly this is the very reason why I don’t think we need religion. The belief of my dad and others like him creating a category of groups of people base on their beliefs is what is wrong with the world. Because that attitude leads to treating other people different because they don’t fit the ideas you identify with. This kind of behavior is a perfect example of a member of an in-group trying to keep the membership of people in the in-group unique just to them. According to Wikipedia, “An in-group is a social group to which a person psychologically identifies as being a member. By contrast, outgroup are socials group with which an individual does not identify.” For example, if I …show more content…
However, let’s say the cat and the dog become friends; they get to know each other and like being friends. They start to let go of the biased view they have for each other and start to let go of the tendency for liking their own group’s members over another group’s member. Despite the fact the dog and cat are friends, the cat - when looking at the dog - still sees the things dogs have in common, like going for walks, barking, and tending to smell each other’s butts when they first meet. The cat’s perception of dogs as similar to each other is call outgroup homogeneity. As we see throughout our history as humans on this beautiful place we call earth. All the wars and killing are because of people believing in different religions. As stated earlier the Holocaust and the Crusades are horrific examples of what happened when men uses religion to hurt and cause harm to
So people like I that believed that a man or a woman can obtain morality can maintained it without religion. I believe this is possible because we live in a new age …show more content…
Dad and many devoted believers like himself, have a belief that we need religion to function as a people. He sometimes tell me that people religious belief no matter what religion they might believe in are the essential part of our civilization for from the beginning of time. He tells me that atheist don’t lead to nothing and atheism don’t promise me nothing but a worthless life followed by death. Paradoxically he have a belief that religion is also the example of free speech. He also argue that religion no matter what kind it may be is a force for good. Without religion we will not have all the good things we have now, like missionary work and no ethics to live a good and meaningful life by. Sadly this is the very reason why I don’t think we need religion. The belief of my dad and others like him creating a category of groups of people base on their beliefs is what is wrong with the world. Because that attitude leads to treating other people different because they don’t fit the ideas you identify with. This kind of behavior is a perfect example of a member of an in-group trying to keep the membership of people in the in-group unique just to them. According to Wikipedia, “An in-group is a social group to which a person psychologically identifies as being a member. By contrast, outgroup are socials group with which an individual does not identify.” For example, if I …show more content…
However, let’s say the cat and the dog become friends; they get to know each other and like being friends. They start to let go of the biased view they have for each other and start to let go of the tendency for liking their own group’s members over another group’s member. Despite the fact the dog and cat are friends, the cat - when looking at the dog - still sees the things dogs have in common, like going for walks, barking, and tending to smell each other’s butts when they first meet. The cat’s perception of dogs as similar to each other is call outgroup homogeneity. As we see throughout our history as humans on this beautiful place we call earth. All the wars and killing are because of people believing in different religions. As stated earlier the Holocaust and the Crusades are horrific examples of what happened when men uses religion to hurt and cause harm to