Criminogenic indiscrimination of creeds
‘Thou shalt not question’.
The Future of an Illusion
Religions are based on holy moral dogmas. Each faith modifies the conscience of its adherents according to its own principles and needs. Freedom of thought is unhealthy to religions. From a religious point of view human rights must be heresy because they allow doubt and change of beliefs.
Different beliefs are mutually exclusive and religions are more or less intolerant of one another. And the most xenophobic are monotheistic religions because of their authoritarian deity and simplified mythology. This explains why Abrahamic religions are so militant even to each other.
By treating religions equally democracy tries to render them safe. It respects religious dogmas and grants religious freedoms with the aim of keeping the peace. Actually, democratic organization supports different qualities of moral conscience concurrently. This, however, is irresponsible and dangerous. It not only empowers irrational conservatism but arouses interreligious hostility and provokes interethnic violence.
To allow freedom of thought and speech but to sanction some of the logical actions that they encourage is ineffective and hypocritical. Crimes committed after the dictates of religious conscience are blamed on individuals and not on their faiths. Punishing of individuals does not change the moral code that has cultivated the crime. Wrongdoers may be punished but that which has incited them to crime remains uncorrected. The freedom of religion benefits institutions at the expense of individuals.
Religions especially abstract monotheisms are very conservative. By tolerating religions democratic societies actually maintain a state of holy wars. They try to keep religious wars in the state of a cold war without open violence but this is formal and ineffective.
Democracy penalizes wrongdoings but not wrong credos. It tolerates intentions but sanctions some of their natural results. Democratic legislation corrects actions and not the beliefs that have instigated them. It restricts crimes externally by law but allows and even stimulates their ripening from inside.
Prisoners of religious conscience
To democracy religious principles are as holy and uncriticizable as they are for religious people. Even in democratic systems religious dogmas enjoy diplomatic immunity. Even when religious convictions provoke crime they remain innocent. Democracy may be overtolerant of religions but they do not pay like for like. Especially intolerant is the abstract monotheism of circumcising religions. Abstract monotheism is theocratic and undemocratic by nature. As a result in democratic nations like in Islamic countries violence done in the name of faith is uncorrectable and religious compulsion is more or less legalized. Even in western democracies religious motivations are unpunishable and are outside the jurisdiction control. Opinions about faiths are considered undemocratic: they are undesirable and are silently censured. In democratic societies freedom of speech about religious values is only formal. The abstract definition of conscience makes all citizens prisoners of religious conscience under relaxed liberal regime.
Democratic outlook considers religious ideologies normal and safe. It holds a surficial belief that religious intolerance stems from disrespect for religions and religious freedoms. A democratic view does not see the intimate connection of religious faith and religious intolerance. It does not understand that religious intolerance is the natural continuation of religious convictions.
Often democratic legislation uses irrational religious metaphors that are liable to frivolous interpretations. It even encourages their learning at school. The democratic overtolerance of theocratic religions educates in unclear and ethnocentric reasoning and in effect sets time-bombs in the classrooms.
The abstractedness of the definition of conscience makes democracy helpless to judge upon religion and religious pedocircumcision. And this abstractedness comes from the unspecific character and diversity of religious morals that democracy comprises. Like intentions beliefs are criminogenic factors and must be held in check. Especially greedy are those that are fed by chronic pleasure dissatisfaction.