
Originally Posted by
ColinClout(c)
My apologies if I am talking off topic. The reason I began with this point is as follows.
If we are asking whether or not organised religion is destructive, I would argue that the primary issue is whether the teaching of that particular religion is (or is not) true. If it is not true, it might be useful for some other end that we agree to be desirable (although we would then have to ask where we get the values from that allow us to say anything is desirable), in which case it is helpful or constructive. However, if the ends change or the means no longer work, as long as the teaching is not true, we are at liberty to change it.
If, however, the teaching is true, regardless of whether we find it comforting, convenient, upsetting or unpalatable, we cannot change it, and we would be foolish to live in denial of it. So truth come before usefulness.
'Colin'