Crazymann said:
While I respect your interpretation, you are teetering on a massive slippery slope. By that line of thought, any obsession can be thought of as a religion. Semantically, and logically, that is incorrect. Music is (literally) my life and calling, but I don't worship Orpheus or Pan. Plus there are numerous religious people who are most definitely not obsessed with that facet of their life (they merely take comfort in it). I am not particularly religous myself, but I do see the value in it. Not everyone is born with a moral compass and religion can provide that. Only when taken to extremes does it become a problem. |
I'm not saying that any obsession can be thought of as a religion, i'm saying that religion covers any kind of worshipping. Like you said, music is your life, but it's not a religion if you don't worship music artists or the concept of music, etc., if you worshiped Mozart, or the G-minor chord, or the drums, then it would be a religion. And even if you worshiped music, it would not be violent until you decided to do riots or take lives for the sake of music, i agree on that.
Like i said in previous posts, the Germans who worshiped Hitler and the Argentinians who worship Maradona are both in a religion, the difference is in the agenda. Like i also said, all religions are made by humans, and humans are the ones that decide which path to follow, and that goes for religious leaders and religious followers.
I'm not against people having religious beliefs (i would be happy if everyone didn't have blind faith and all the world could have critical thinking, but like Voltaire said "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend with my life your right to say it.") , what i'm against is people carrying those beliefs to state laws, policies, state schools, etc. because when that happens, we enter in discrimination, massive irrationality, and in extreme cases, violence in all levels.
As for the moral issue, moral can be thought without religion, although it's more challenging, i give you that.