Hmmm...
You're wrong about religion being a moral code: there's no reason why that should be the case, and though most (all?) religions have a moral code in some sense, that's not the same thing. Nor is your "acceptance" mantra anything beyond a vague Western liberal wooliness. Sorry. (Look: imagine, for the nonce, that god exists, but that he's morally indifferent, or a bastard. What's to say that god isn't a violent homophobic racist? There's no reason to expect him to be a Guardian reader...)

The idea of setting up a religion to reflect the times is a non-starter. Religious people have an account of the way the world ought to be: the way it is need make no odds to them at all.

You also need to give an account of "basic principles" if your idea is to have legs. Why is "helping other people" so important, and what counts as help? (To give a loose analogy - the Tories and Labour both claim to be helping people, but based on a radically different account of what that is.) And, by the same token, what does "bettering yourself" mean? What standard are you using? And why does any of this have to be cast in religious terms anyway?



Can't stay - work to do. *sigh*
( Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Mon 30 Jun 2008, 9:19, Reply)