by Mike Edwards
You may be asking what could religion and politics possibly have in common. Both arenas resort to name calling and leads to stifling of free speech. Religion much more in the past, and now politics has followed in its path. In religion if you don’t agree with one’s view of God or interpretation of the Bible, you are labeled a heretic. In politics if you disagree with one on immigration, climate change, etc. you are labeled a conspiracist. Often, these uncivil actions lead to denying or attempt to censor the opposing view point.
What is Free Speech.
It may shock some people that I believe the use of the N _ _ _ _ _ word should be allowed on any media platform to remain consistent in my views of free speech. Even the evil behavior in my opinion behavior of denying that the Holocaust actually happened. Those who engage in such actions exhibit hate for black people or Jews. I say why let them hide behind such beliefs by not having the freedom to express themselves. One can be a racist in their thoughts or words but they cannot advocate violence toward those not of their color. I didn’t say race. There is one human race in my opinion. The melatonin of your skin determines your color.
Without such free speech, there can be no debate of ideas or information if blacks are inferior to whites or that Jews have not been grossly persecuted over the centuries. Such ideas should be exposed in public for others to know one’s beliefs. By chance one is open to change, free discussions can only possibly lead to change. I like my chances of winning the debate.
The problem with labels
What are often labeled conspiracies are really just theories/speculations. It isn’t a conspiracy if it could be true! Truth should be viewed as a journey to be discovered. Anyone who accuses one being a conspiracist or heretic should have to defend their views that are supposedly truer, rather than attempting to censor. How can a conversation remain civil when name-calling begins. When one says they doubt a loving God would create a literal Hell, each should have to defend their position which may mean looking at different biblical passages. Many who believe in a literal Hell believe so because of their interpretation of Scriptures. Name-calling allows one to not have to defend their point of view and veers the conversation off the topic/disagreement at hand. The path to change is considering opposing beliefs. I find it hard to trust one when avoiding discussion/debate. It often turns out labelers/accusers are the source of misinformation.
What is a supposed Heretic?
Matters labeled heresies today are much different than earlier in history perhaps, but past and present accusers share something in common – accusers are claiming their interpretation of the Bible is the correct one. Many will proclaim “the Bible says” without acknowledging many don’t agree with their interpretation. Scholars do not agree on many moral issues. I was told often when younger that the Bible teaches there is a literal hell where unbelievers in the afterlife or tortured with fire forever after a few short years living here on planet earth. 12 Reasons To Believe Hell Is A Myth! Moral of story – don’t believe everything you hear claimed about God! See here. Other viewpoints are also claimed to be heresy without discussion:
- God didn’t inspire the Bible, thus approved, all written in the Bible See here.
- Salvation in the Bible isn’t about avoiding Hell and getting into HeavenSee here.
- One can’t be a Christian if not attending the institutional church. In the Bible “Church” was not a building or a place attended once a week. Jesus referred to His followers as being the Church. Jesus did not specify where followers must gather or what they must do. Find environments to be encouraged and inspire others to love as radically as Jesus did. Some of us grew weary of religion but not God. See here.
What is a supposed conspiracist?
The truth is settled science isn’t science. Turns out the so-called conspiracists weren’t the misinformers. For only a few examples:
- Covid virus leaked from a lab – Many were kicked off/censored from mainstream platforms because they suggested the Covid virus came from a Chinese lab. Turns out they were right. The Government now agrees years later. We weren’t allowed to ask questions
- Masks – Those who claimed masks didn’t prevent the spread of a virus were called mis-informers. Turns out a review that dug into findings of 78 randomized controlled trials discovered wearing masks made little or no difference in stopping the virus. See here. Lots of my friends who wore masks got Covid. Their level of symptoms no different than mine.
- It has been declared in the past that the Covid vaccines prevented infection and transmission of the disease. That was the purpose of mandates and protecting grandma. Scientists and doctors who declared otherwise were censored, but it turns out they weren’t the mis-informers.
Free speech is necessary to allow the battle of ideas when certainty doesn’t exist
A preacher can’t claim God condemns gays because the Bible says so. Many of us don’t believe the Bible says any such thing. See here. Most of us believe except true racists that all humans are created equal, not that one’s skin color determines superiority. Yes, the KKK is allowed to state their hate speech on public platforms. I like my chances of winning that argument in the free market of ideas. I enjoy racists being exposed for their ideas. The only free speech that should be censored is that which encourages others to commit violence on others. You can’t say “any Jew you see should be killed.”
How do we move forward
We should question authorities in all areas of our life in case they are wrong. Because of my early religious experiences and contrarian personality – I knew to question health experts who said to trust them without debate. I would suggest you are better off doubting what you have been told and verify it for yourself. It can save you from regretful decisions in the arenas of religion, science, and politics. Assume uncertainty if you have one rational friend who believes differently from you whether it’s about religion, science, or politics.
It should be intuitive those who reject diverse opinions is unloving and controlling. Most don’t except such behaviors in their personal relationships. Having good intentions by believing you are right for the whole doesn’t matter if you could be wrong. We should all be discussing “What leads to the greater good.” Religious leaders seem hell-bent in telling people what they must believe about God according to their understanding and interpretation of the Bible. Scientists or Politicians who refuse debate of their policies are no different. Leaders play God (Superior) in the lives of others by claiming to know the truth and we can’t decide for ourselves.
Imagine a world that openly pursued truth
“When you tear out a man’s tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you’re only telling the world that you fear what he might say.” ― George R.R. Martin
Mike Edwards was added as a writer and has been a great addition to the site. Mike provides many interesting views and various ways of looking at things. He is not afraid to ask questions and he keeps an open mind as to teachings of the institutional church. Mike also has his own site where he writes at What God May Really Be Like
Done with Religion 