Here iv'e played out a scenario in which not only am I less than inclined to condemn your assailants actions, I openly exonerate him, and with a repugnant level of ostentation I declare my longing for an opportunity to accord him due praise. Were I to merely hold this belief, let lone act in this manner, my moral compass would and should be held under a considerable amount of scrutiny. After all, what kind of a person would be so lacking in empathy and impelled by an astounding display of reprehensible barbarity, to endorse such behavior and revere such a person? Surely, apart from the sociopath, there aren't many people among us who lack the moral responsibility and social conscience to proudly harbor these belief's. On the contrary, belief's of this nature are more common than any morally judicious person would hope for.
There is an unfortunate, although, necessary parallel to be drawn between the above scenario and a particular religious belief. One that has drawn my attention and bolstered my contempt. Let us now adapt the original scene to this belief. The ultimatum you were given was "hand your wallet over, or else", in God's case, it's "accord me your belief, or burn in Hell". Regardless of one's confidence in the veracity of this proposition, the sheer thuggery by which it is propounded, renders the proponent (i.e. God) immoral - considering the fact that He is said so be omniscient, e.g., He knows whether you will accord Him such belief in the first place, or not. You now face an individual who has, without any evidence, bought into the existence of God. They have responded to this ultimatum, one that is also without evidence, by believing, so as not to burn in Hell. Their position now, is one of Faith and this veneration is often rooted in fear. Going a step further, this person now proclaims the same belief as in the first scenario, "I not only endorse your attackers right to inflict such harm, I also long to stand before him in reverence". The corollary is irrefutable
Such a proclamation cannot be anything but the very antithesis of morality. The fact that one may not, in and of themselves condone your descent into a fiery abyss and instead appoint this contemptible role to their God, is a simple shifting of intent and vacuous, to say the least. The very reverence accorded to this despotic and callous figure, (whether God or Human) is a remarkably odious and immoral practice. The question to be asked is, how can one regard this belief as moral and respect it, let alone the person holding it? The belief that you will suffer infinite punishment for a finite "crime", is as ludicrous and repulsive as it is immoral. The adherents' to this fictional tyrant may seemingly, personally feel at ease by entertaining this ultimatum and making a decision, but the real world side-effect's of holding it to be true by iterating His right to do so, then worshiping Him, would be tantamount to worshiping the brute in our first scenario. To uphold this morally detestable position when it comes to God, only reduces one's moral sensibilities to a withering pile, (just as it would do so in the first scenario) bringing upon themselves the righteous indignation of others.
The effect's of this belief are pernicious to social relationships, societal well-being and moral responsibility. Such belief's, withdraw detrimental amounts of laudable righteousness from ones moral savings, only to be squandered and misappropriated, potentially leaving one despicably, unequivocally and utterly, morally bankrupt.
- "There can be but little liberty on earth while men worship a tyrant in heaven" - Robert G. Ingersoll
