[SEB Guest Post] A Late Night Thought on Prohibitions and Rules

If you wish your prohibitions and rules to be based upon reason, then you should look more to adopting etiquettes and manners than to adopting religious morals.

The rules for which fork to use, or for what constitutes polite conversation, typically employ more logic and evidence in their creation and defense than do any church’s prohibition against using condoms or prohibition against homosexual marriages.

The Pope, for instance, employs more reason deciding when and where to spit than he does deciding the morality of divorce.

It is mere unthinking prejudice that so many people consider religious morals to be of greater weight than etiquettes and manners, for, in truth, religious morals are more often based on fluffy thinking than are the latter.

Cross-posted at Café Philos

5 thoughts on “[SEB Guest Post] A Late Night Thought on Prohibitions and Rules

  1. Pingback: A Late Night Thought on Rules and Prohibitions « Café Philos: an internet café

  2. Egad… it’s Paul, and he’s on SEB!

    Likely the Pope does put some thought into his prohibition of condoms or homosexual marriage. It’s just that he’s starting with faulty premises. You know, GIGO…

  3. Hi George! I see you are skipping church to hang out with stupid evil bastards today. Tut Tut! No wonder you’re a non-theist!

    Yeah, I think there’s a lot of GIGO going on with the Pope and other religious leaders. That’s an excellent point!

    I would say, however, that while he might put thought into his prohibition of condoms or homosexual marriage there’s not much to suggest he puts a lot of reason (logic and evidence) into that thinking.

  4. “employs more reason deciding when and where to spit”

    Lol, the contortions they bend themselves around when they try to wrap church law and religious texts around reality show that they have pretty smart and imaginative brains. They are just pretty fixed on what they think the results should be.

    Gosh, the captchas are deviously difficult to read these days.

  5. Hi Ingolfson! That’s a good point: Some of them do indeed have pretty smart and imaginative brains. On the other hand, I’m not sure I would call the contortions they bend their thoughts around in “reason”. At least, I would not call their mode of thinking “reason” so long as there is a distinction between reasoning and rationalizing.

    So it’s not just my imagination that the captcha’s have gotten worse?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.