::INSERT SWEAR WORDS::

[trinityvixen]

(Trigger warning. I never give trigger warnings, SO BE FUCKING WARNED, ALL RIGHT?)

What the fuck?

No, really: WHAT THE FUCKING FUCK!?!


...people do some fucked up shit in war. (Not to mention in the name of God.)

For one second, I was able to peak past the horror and go, "Wow, that is devastatingly effective." Then I went back to being horrified. Whattheshitshitshitshitshit!?!

Comments

[wellgull.livejournal.com]

Eh, I figure she could just as easily have been traumatized by living in Saddamist society -- it wasn't exactly rosy, and they weren't kidding when they talked about the "rape rooms" and such. I don't know anything about her biography; I'm guessing that she must have been radicalized by something that happened during the Occupation (because she started doing this), but maybe that was just an opportunity to let loose with the crazy?

I'm interested in the phrase "the 'greater good' argument against religion." How do you mean? I mean, personally I am highly suspicious of most violent acts done in the name of the greater good, and of "greater good" arguments generally--such that I think that they may actually taint whatever ends they're applied to, though I haven't really decided on that--but I hadn't meant to go there with this; do say more!

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

What I meant was that religions, by dint of appeal to a super-human creator being have established unassailable beachheads of thought that can reconcile any demand or dogma with the "well, the Sky Fairy says it has to be this way, too fucking bad if you disagree." Their "greater good" is thus structured to ignore any signs of suffering on Earth--and their thinking cannot be challenged by suffering on Earth. Their illogical, unreasonable demands lead them more often than not back to the "greater good" argument because they can't defend much otherwise. Non-theist dogmatics also appeal to "greater good," but with rare exceptions, they tend to lose power if there isn't some proof that their deeds actually produce a tangible, physical improvement in general welfare. A religious zealot has no such limitation--everything can go to Hell on Earth so long as the greater good is done by Heaven.

That's why I call it the "greater good" argument against religion: people who judge what is good and what is not entirely by rules that are immutable and out-dated and who will ignore the evidence of their eyes and their experience are not worthy to hold power over anybody. In essence, if someone starts spouting about the greater good their work will do by your soul rather than your mind, body, or spirit (in this case your emotional response/joie de vive more than soul), DO NOT TRUST THEM.