RELIGIOUS SIN

Now let us look at religious sin from another direction. Without question, there are actions, open and hidden that are harmful to the individual doing them and to the individuals to whom those actions are done. Many actions are wrong because they do hurt, either those doing them, or others who are harmed as a result of those actions or words. There are other actions that hurt only the doers of those actions. Still other actions hurt briefly but their long-range effects are for the good of the doer and/or those done unto. Then there are actions that no one can tell in the short run, or in the long run, if the actions are good or bad.

The religious tell us it is a "religious sin" to become angry. Yet, there are examples in the Bible of "righteous" men becoming very angry, even to the killing of children because they called an old man “bald head.” Holy men even today, urge their believers to get mad at Atheists, gay people, abortion doctors, different ethnic peoples, politicians who do not follow their dictates, people of other beliefs in far away places and such. Believers are urged to even get angry at other competing religions and concepts of life. They try to get mean and belittling laws passed to make it a criminal offense to pursue other beliefs, ideas and faiths.

There are many events and ideas at which all honest Clear Thinkers should become constructively angry. Prejudice and bigotry are a couple of items worthy of our anger. Senseless crime is another. Stealing our freedoms and our right to honest doubt and honest thinking is another. Telling harmful and scary lies to our children is still another. Worthy of our honest anger are those blatant political or religious aggressions against individuals, people of other colors, people of other beliefs, nonreligious organizations, or nations of different political philosophies.

What one does with his anger is vitally important in determining whether or not that anger is wrong or hurtful. "Turning the other cheek" can often be more wrong (sinful) than defending one's own self, or striking back. Bullies, whether they are political, religious or just self-motivated, should be dealt with according to common sense and the size or importance of the strike against you. Not defending yourself, your family, your nation, or your high ideals, may be a far worse "sin" than defending them.

You have been told by the religions, that you should not kill people. Yet the church itself, sanctions murder or killings in war, police actions, defense of home and family, "legal" executions and so forth. Some religions even encourage the killing of others (those not of their belief) as in Ireland, Iran, Palestine, Israel, USA and many other places. So even around such a drastic and permanent action as killing, there are many gray areas.

Let's assume a ninety-year-old is in a coma and shows no brain wave. Yet machines can still pump food, blood and air into the body for thousands of dollars a day, for which the children must pay. Is it murder to refuse to treat him? What is a living soul? (See The Soul in Chapter 30.)

These are questions about which I have definite opinions, but my opinion is not the point. The point is, even in what appears at first to be a clearly cut and dried case for what the religious call sin, or right and wrong, suddenly bogs down in a gray mud when examined closely. When the religions of thousands of years ago made decisions, even they sat up tribunals to decide on the various shades of wrong or right. When religion could not be certain as to what was right and wrong thousands of years ago in a simple society, how can it claim today that a set of priestly rules laid down thousands of years ago are valid in our complex society?

Often times, to judge right and wrong a long time after the event, is to still be left in doubt. In the spring of 1941, in order to help the Chinese, President Roosevelt ordered an attack on Tokyo, but his military staff talked him out of it. In December of 1941, the Japanese attacked us. How much judgment should we place today on President Roosevelt who is proven to have known of the attack on Pearl Harbor ahead of time and might have stopped the attack with a single wireless message before it started. If he knew, I doubt he had any idea the damage would be so great. But if we hadn't been shaken out of our complacency at that time, might we not now be speaking German or Japanese?

Roosevelt made a decision. He made it in what he thought to be in the best interest of our country. He may have known ahead of time. If so, he let the Japanese bomb Pearl Harbor. If he knew, I doubt if he or the Japanese knew how successful that attack would be. He did get the carriers out of Pearl Harbor. Several have testified to this chain of events. Was he wrong? Those whose fathers and sons died at Pearl Harbor may think so, but truthfully I do not know. Do you?

So where are we now? We are finding out right and wrong (called sin by the religions) is not clear-cut. The church has neither the right, nor the authority to decide these things. We must do it ourselves as a society and as individuals. We must learn to take into consideration the situations involved. So we make a decision to do something. If that decision is out of hatred or passions of some sort, the action is probably wrong. If it is made out of honest logical thought, it is more likely to be right. But Clear Thinkers and our peers, or those who have gone before us, have decided that the community itself shall judge things that adversely affect others. So, a jury and judge hold a trial to help decide. Precedents are set and the precedents gradually become law.

We have far too many laws, but even this surplus of laws help the individual decide what action to take. If an action is against the law that means we must weigh our planned action in light of its being illegal. If the contemplated act is legal, that too must be weighed. Finally, we realize even social rights and wrongs are often very hard to determine.

At no time does the Clear Thinker deny that there are actions that are right and actions, which are wrong. But there are times when he will take actions that are judged illegal by the laws of society. At times one is forced to conform to laws, many of which were placed on the law books because of religious bigotry and superstition. At such times, the Clear Thinker may break the law, often openly, in order to point up the fact that the law itself is morally wrong. Sometimes he will break immoral laws because he has no regard for hypocritical and bigoted rules and laws. At such times he may hope he will be accused of the infraction in order to get the law itself reviewed by a more enlightened group of peers.

The morality and ethics of Clear Thinking is most often in conflict with religious morality, but seldom in conflict with the laws of society. This within itself says there is a bit more of the Clear Thinking philosophy in social interaction than one might at first expect. But when one realizes our basic laws to determine right and wrong were made by Deists and rebels against the rules and morality of religion, then the fact becomes more evident. The Clear Thinking philosophy is far better for the justice and harmony of mankind than are the dictatorial religious laws and philosophies.

The church often would drag people from their homes at any hour of the day or night, accuse them of a religious sin, try them before one or a few clerics, render their judgment and carry out the sentence before the accused had any recourse or rebuttal. Sometimes they had finished carrying out the sentence before the sun rose. Soon after the sun rose, using their judicial and police powers, they confiscated the property of the “sinner or heretic.” In other words, the justice of religion (and of government) is very Dictatorial. In response to this abuse of human rights and the denial that a person has the right to think or defend himself, the Clear Thinking philosophy rose up and began to defend men against the tyranny of organized religion.

Now in this country we have Clear Thinking types of laws that protect a man in his own home. Official warrants of search or arrest must be filed and approved (to the disgust of many religious and political authorities). One is to be considered innocent until proven guilty. Defense counsel must be allowed. Bond and bail must be allowed. Trial by one's peers must be allowed and one is in part protected from the dictatorial judgment of those authorities that Believe differently from the defendant. Appeal of the judgments must be allowed. The religious seek daily to take these Clear Thinking (Atheist) protections away from us. (Now they have by the Patriot Act.)

Courts have been established whose job it is to determine if the law itself is unjust or illegal. (I see this phase of our freedom soon coming to a close.) Clear Thinkers have been in the forefront pushing for good government since Europeans first came to this country and even before. The only organizations in the USA which do not operate under our constitutional laws (in 1989) are the CIA, FBI, NSA, the military, NASA (and a few other branches) the IRS, the Federal Reserve System and Religion. Have we no room for improvement here?

Today, there is great pressure on our legal system by those who "Believe" and call themselves conservative, religious, law-abiding citizens. They wish unhindered powers of search and seizure to be placed in the hands of our FBI, police, CIA, IRS, ATF, Border Patrol, military and other enforcement branches of our government. They wish for confinement of the suspect until the trial. Can you say, "Dictatorial?” Is this not a sin by the religious believers? But sad to contemplate, they will probably succeed.

[But now they have. The criminal and dictatorial “Patriot Act” (pushed by these same religious and political authorities) has stolen these Clear Thinking types of laws that protected us from their Beliefs and their Power. And of course, it is all done in the name of our security and protection, “for the good of our citizens and our children.” Added 2004]

For two hundred and fifty years the churches continued to suppress justice in this country anyway they could. They do not consider their own actions as a sin. Until recent times in the USA, a Clear Thinker (Atheist) could not give evidence in a court of law. In addition, before one could be accepted in court, that person had to testify to his "belief" in God (Protestant, Catholic or Jewish one). One had to also swear to tell the truth on the “Word of God.” He had to exhibit superstitious and gullible behavior and call upon a denominational God (who admits he lies) to help him tell the truth about some matter. It was as if one could not be trusted to tell the truth unless he was first willing to lie about an imagined deity who would force him to tell the truth. Tell me that is honest. Tell me that is not a true Religious Sin. (Are Clear Thinkers soon to lose this protection again?)

The literalist and conservative believers, especially in the South, but in other areas as well, tried to keep the blacks disenfranchised from American society. They lobbied for laws and fought for segregation every way in which they had the power to do so. Wasn't that religious sin? Thanks to the Clear Thinking philosophy that narrow "I am right and you are wrong" view failed.

The church has had all the ready answers for the problems of the world. Almost everything that the church cannot closely control, they call it a religious sin. How many men, women and children lived in hell, or were murdered because there was no divorce, no abortion and little or no justice for Christians and non-Christians alike? The people, who knew and loved the truth and the Clear Thinking philosophy of life, spoke out, worked hard, suffered and finally won victories that made this nation the envy of all the peoples of the world.

Now what is right and wrong to a Clear Thinker? First let me say, often one just does not know what is right and what is wrong. The law may have a definite statement to make, but don't forget, most laws are made by the "Haves" to protect the wealthy and powerful from the "Have-nots.”

There is no law against a man and his family starving to death in this land of plenty. But there are a great many laws that keep that same man from working (think green cards, welfare, social security and such here). He may not legally beg a loaf of bread from someone who has enough to waste. There are also laws that keep that same starving man from planting his own wheat and raising his own hens, sometimes even if that starving man owns or rents his own little plot of land. There are laws that keep that man from begging help from others more fortunate than him. There are even laws that keep that starving man from hunting wild meat for his own table. Wild meat is simply a sport for those who can afford it but do not need it. We should have seasons for the poor to legally hunt wild meat for their own tables and not burden them excessive fees and licenses.

That same man may not be eligible for welfare, nor can he find work, or even make work. What can he do? Well he can do what the "Haves" wish him to do. He can admit that he is no good to himself or to Their society. He can get caught in a criminal act, say of stealing bread. Now that he has fulfilled the concept of the "Haves" and proven that he is dependent on the "Haves,” he will be fed. His wife and children can now apply for welfare and get food, clothes, shelter and even some spending money.

I am talking about a series of laws that though they appear right at first glance, the end results are wrong. Laws that force a man to steal and hang around until he gets caught are not right or just. There are many unjust laws that dilute the rights of the individual, taxes that rob the poor and middle class, procedures that only the rich can follow, business requirement instituted by the biggies to keep out the little competitors, fees that discourage independent small businesses, building requirements to protect the big contractors from the little ones and many, many, more.

There are laws that punish families for working. Think about that! Many on welfare find a job paying a good wage will not allow them to have a living equal to that which they can have by being on welfare and not working. Whose crazy idea was this? Some say Labor and the Unions want it that way to lessen competition. Whatever, it is wrong.

When the Clear Thinker must make a decision, he weighs all the aspects available to him. He makes his choice, does his action and takes the consequences. He may never know if the action is right or wrong, or he may know at once. But he is well versed in making decisions and taking the risks because he doesn't let long dead people or others make his decisions for him. He does his Own thinking. The Clear Thinker does not accept the precept that the ends justify the means. To him the means are just as much a part of the ends as are the goals for which the means are activated. But he may use harsh means if necessary. However, the true Clear Thinker is not harsh by nature. By nature, he is a logically thinking, caring human being. He hopes to live and let live. The Clear Thinker has the highest set of morals known to mankind. The reason is, he knows he is responsible for his own actions. He knows by demonstrating fair play and justice in his actions, he will influence others to consider both his philosophy and his sense of justice.

Again, right and wrong (or religious sin) to a Clear Thinker is not a divine matter. Right and wrong is relative to the situation. He will consider what is legal in his decision, but he does not let that become the sole factor in his decision.

Some states have sex laws that make almost any form of sex outside of the home illegal and many forms in the home illegal. Honest Clear Thinkers, as well as most Believers, do not let such ignorance pushed into law by the teachers of superstition keep them from their pleasures. Nor will they let such laws keep them from their business. Clear Thinkers will also try to get such medieval religious and superstitious laws repealed and ridiculed. Often they do this by going to court to test the laws and show them up for what they are, inhumane, immoral and irrational.

Who knows what the right and wrong ways are to: raise children, solve family disputes, deal with an offensive neighbor, court a sweetheart, teach a school subject, elect a representative or keep a neighborhood safe? The religionists recite rules made two thousand or more years before television, radio, books, universal education, jet and automobile travel and before psychology and modern science. The Clear Thinker looks at today's problems in light of today's knowledge. He doesn't think in terms of religious rights and wrongs (or sin). He thinks in terms of desired results, fairness, justice and peace among men.

To the Clear Thinker, fairness and truthfulness are matters of personal honor. Fairness (justice) and truthfulness are also the foundations upon which a successful and lasting civilization must be built. But before a person can be either fair or truthful in his conduct with his fellow man, he must learn to be Honest With Himself. He must think through the matter at hand. In other words, he must learn to think honestly for and with himself.

Too often, the Christian religion sets itself up as the judge, jury and executioner of other men. Religion wishes to do All the thinking for people. It is this attitude that is a great sin in the eyes of the Clear Thinker. Men, women and children have been burned at the stake, tortured, buried alive, starved to death, run through with the sword, beheaded and placed in terrible prisons worse than death. All of this because it was the only way to save these people's "souls" from their "sins" and Scare others into conforming to the changing rules, ideas and laws put forth by their religious and political leaders.

Isn't it amazing how religious sins keep changing? Yesterday's sin is today's acceptable behavior. Being a member of another religion or a Wicca (Witch) used to be a sin. Not attending church used to be a sin. Dressing sexy used to be a sin. Showing skin used to be a sin. Then murder is not a sin if God or the government orders it. Theft is not a sin if it is accomplished by legal words from the government, or religious words from the church. Lying is not a sin if it is couched in legal terms and appears in small print at the end of the document. Adultery is not a sin if there is a divorce in between. I could go on but you see the point. What is personal sin?

PERSONAL SIN IS WHATEVER THE CHURCH SAYS IT IS - TODAY.

Injustices of all kinds have been perpetrated on the innocent for "their own good.” The truth of the matter is religion found it easier to kill or imprison those who disagreed with them, or who were capable of thinking, than it was to answer their questions, facts and arguments. The Clear Thinker looks at the history of the Christian church and finds what should be the true definition of the word "Sin." The Clear Thinker’s definition of sin is:

THAT WHICH DEGRADES, BELITTLES
AND HARMS HIMSELF AND OTHERS.

By this definition, the Christian church is the greatest sinner among us. Those who blindly believe and carry out the superstitious bigotry of the religions are guilty of the worst kind of sin. Even God must be ashamed of the Believers and their religious and political organizations.

While the church lives its own sinful life, it carries on its business of teaching the unbelievable lie of religious sin and original sin. Then they add their expensive remedy of forgiveness, salvation, heaven and the rest. Only those who Do Not Think are caught up in the sticky trap of the churches. There is no such thing as religious sin! There is no such thing as original sin!

There is however, that sin, which degrades, belittles and harms oneself and others. Most of the believers are guilty of this sin by demonstrating bigotry, prejudice and faked superiority. They are guilty of it by condemning others who do not follow their inhumane rules and beliefs. They are guilty of it by teaching lies and falsehoods to others and claiming that their lies are the truth. They are guilty of it by belittling their own God, claiming they can get him to run their chores for them. They are guilty by claiming they can force God to forsake His Own good judgment and follow their orders (by prayer). They are guilty of it by placing guilt and fear into the minds of others and especially in the minds of little children.

Yes, they are guilty of the only sin that counts - and they Know it. And this knowledge that they are wrong, makes them guilty of this sin in a special way. They then become Hostile to those who disagree with them, even using murder, cross burning, beatings, mob action, bombings, telling lies and other violent means to express that hostility. And That “IS” Religious Sin. The religious are daily committing Sin against US. The verdict is - Guilty!

The secret of escaping from the clutches of inhumane religion, its teachings of religious sin, original sin and its desire to make all of its members into mental slaves and captives, is to be found in the simple fact of desiring to know the Honest Truth about those things around us. This Honest desire is scared out of people at a very early age by the church and by the government.

The secret to escaping from the lies and superstitions of the church, politics and business is to do some Honest Clear Thinking.

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS ORIGINAL SIN!
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS RELIGIOUS SIN!

RELIGIOUS SIN IS JUST ANOTHER RELIGIOUS LIE!

Next: Learning to Think

Index