[MD] new blog

[Platt Holden]

> Platt said:
> If someone finds value in believing in God, leprechauns or a rabbit's
> foot, who is to say they are wrong other than those who believe everyone
> should believe what they believe and try to force their beliefs on others
> by ridicule, intimidation or at the point of a gun?
> 
> 
> dmb says:Adding to Arlo's reply, I'd say you're being a bit of a drama
> queen. Nobody here has a gun and "force" is a pretty weird way to
> characterize the use of words, which is all we have as far as weapons go.

Thinking of words are weapons illustrates my point. 

> And so what if the disagreements have been vigorous (especially mine)?
> That just means that people think it's important, that we all care about
> the issue. 
> But mostly I'd object to the notion that it's okay to believe in God so
> long as one "finds value" in it. Using the word "value" speciously makes
> it seem like it would be endorsed by the MOQ but going by that usage we
> can say sloth, intellectual laziness, crack cocaine and murderous revenge
> are okay so long as we find value in it.

Sloth and intellectual laziness is in the eye of the beholder. Drugs have 
been praised here as mind-expanding. Justifiable homicide is just one of 
the many degrees of murder.  


>Obviously, that would be
> nonsense. In fact, one of the problems with religious beliefs is that
> people find it so emotionally satisfying and even when the practical
> consequences are harmful.

The practical consequences of nonreligious beliefs have also been harmful 
to others.  

> It can be used as a kind of escapism. It can put
> an end to one's own personal growth. It can be used to justify horrible
> crimes. This isn't always the case, of course, but let's not pretend that
> it doesn't matter. 

Lets not pretend that atheists are any more humane than theists.