Sacred Landscapes

close
more_vert

I can't answer for Baza, but I read baza's opinions and shared them.

I would say that it is a type of principle and if you follow it through you get a logical conclusion, which can seem harsh. If you believe that belief in religion is wrong, then naturally everything they believe is 'wrong' to you. Not 'wrong' as in shout it in their face, "you are wrong, you must change", but 'wrong' compared to your stance.

This, to me, is similar (but with a lot more ownership and free thinking) to the Christian, and other religions, belief in a principle that they have been taught and have been told is 'correct', and to them therefore everything that is opposed to their principle is 'wrong' to them. However, they would rarely be brave enough to admit that they believe other people are 'wrong'. I'm afraid, in my experience, this is something that goes hand in hand with religion - the idea that everyone else is 'wrong'. Take that away from most religions and they crumble. Allow one chink in the armour to appear, one logical argument to be accepted, one leap of faith to be questioned, and down she goes.

I think your last para is spot on.

However what we all need to do I think is substitute "wrong" with "different"

Do this and we might all get along a little better

I think you have to understand that for a significant part of history, belief in a specific religion has been manditory, regardless of your personal opinions, and that religion has been used to manipulate and control countless populations. You may be right to say this is wrong, but you should also recognise that it happens and possibly did happen during the times that we are studying and should therefore be acknowledged.

It is wrong to dismiss religion as a motive for building a monument. If you cannot relate to that being a reason to build a monument then you may not be able to understand it. Then again, you might be!