Bertrand Russell: a few of his stronger sentiments

by Tani Jantsang, Unknown

Book: "WHY I'M NOT A CHRISTIAN"

"I cannot understand how doctrines leading to fiendish cruelty can be considered to have any good effect upon morals. Was he talking about Nazis or Communists? No.

The attitude of Christians is dangerous to human welfare...extremely dangerous to mental and physical health. (He gives many details all confirmed to be factual, not exaggerations!)

Almost every adult in a Christian community is more or less diseased nervously.

Christians practice cruelty, timidity, and stupidity.

Their attitude toward sex is so morbid and unnatural it can be understood only when taken in relation to the sickness of the civilized world at the time Roman Empire was decaying.

The claim that Christianity has improved the status of women in society is one of the grossest perversions of history that it is posible to make.

People in church are debasing themselves and are contemptible in their behavior there. Christianity is based on words uttered long ago by ignorant men.

Cruelty and religion go hand in hand because they have the same parent: especially craven fear.

Christian ethics are an outlet for sadism which they believe not only to be legitimate, but noble. Christian theology consists of rationalizations for sadism. Christianity demands of you ethical perversion.

Christianity's rise coincided with spread of intolerance and persecuting attitudes. The persecution of Christians by Romans before Constantine was by comparison slight and intermittent and wholly political. Even Christian persecution of (other) Christians from Constantine's time to the 17th Century was far more fierce.

ALL of certain Christian's mildness and rationalism today is due to the teaching of men who, in their own day, were persecuted by all orthodox Christians.

Religion itself embodies three human impulses: fear, conceit, and hatred. The purpose of religion is to give an air of respectability to these passions. (I'm not sure I can see this about Islam as practiced in many places. I DO know Islam will USE religion during times of war as a rallying point. Nor do I see this about Jews who, in fact, have many "Jewish" religions. My people do not specifically have any religion, though we speak as IF we do, mythopoetically. We are pretty much like atheists in what we are actually saying/meaning. Deity to us is a hidden force in nature, as real as E.M. or gravity. It is not energy nor is it matter. Modern name: Entropy. That is the ONLY thing that fits our definition of "Deity" when we have to define our meanings.)

Religion is a force for evil and human misery." (This is only true when one tries to IMPOSE religion on others. For what IS religion? Instead of saying "I want you to DO this," it says "GOD wants you to do this and I happen to KNOW God wants you to do it!" The person saying this had a sword at your throat.)

These are some of the stronger sentiments (minus the details he gave which were monstrous) of one of the greatest historians of the 20th Century: a man with historical facts. He was also a logician and mathematician and founder of the anti-nuclear bomb movement called "SANE."

So who regards people who live longer as smarter or more equipped to survive? What if they manage to live longer by sheer artifice? What if the things they do, later doom their own descendents? Then they are not smarter. In the long run they lacked foresight. My people have a saying: interfere NOT with Nature. We are not stupid. We live quite long. We are also quite healthy. No two of us are alike, we even tend to SUSPECT "too much alike" as if one person is trying to copy the other, suspect the copy-cat has no inner life. No self. "Mike and Ike" - Ike is Mike without the M. "M" - well-spring of life, allusions to a well of water. We are innately non-regimental. We are civil, we GET ALONG easily. If one seeks to study the UNIT called "man" OUTSIDE of the environment which man not only is in, but which is IN MAN, then that's another form of dualism-falsehood. Survival by artifice which ruins the environment in terms of survival of SPECIES or type, is folly or lunacy: not intelligence. In a society of "schools," where gross stupidity is protected because all are taught, it is not the smarter ones who will live longer, but the smarter will have to PAY for it as quantity of life rises and quality of life sinks and the earth gets even more overpopulated beyond its capacity to sustain life. I don't believe the majority of human beings are smart enough to get out of the mess they've created and those who can figure out a way, don't give a damn about it: it would entail too much strife going against innately KLIPPOTHIC xian-ish types. People with peace-ethics (that practice it as a living) do not go after inner strife - or ANY strife. People are, by nature, slow to get moving. History shows that only in extreme conditions do people move: they stampede. The rest of us flow. The stampeders do it in fascist formation, falling in line and all jumping into self-destruction UNITED in their fall. LET THEM FALL: we WON'T try to fix anything. Nature will.

Visit: Satanic Reds