Do you believe that a religion can enslave society?

Question

Do you believe that a religion can enslave society?

Answer 1

Of course, just look at Christianity, I wouldn't be surprised if this post got deleted which just further proves my point. A LOT of people are Christian. I don't agree with many Christian morals and I get treated like **** because of it.

Answer 2

it has for the past 2000 years wars waged life's lost  over some phony beliefs

Answer 3

yes it seems to happen all the time.

Answer 4

h**l ya! Look at Christianity it even says in the bible. you will worship me and no one else! I want you to hate the planet to love me.

Answer 5

Yes, it can, and this occurs in a theocracy, when the religion  has too many restrictions on day to day activities. The beliefs then have the force of law and government behind them, and the citizen has no recourse to them. Adulterers may be stoned, for example. There are places in the world today where this occurs.

Regards,

Dan

Answer 6

Enslave is a strong wording because it implies a worsening of people's life rather than culturally enriching.  

There are many historical instances of this though.  The ancient Egyptian culture functioned on substantially levels of slavery justified by the will of the Pharoahs as mortal gods.  There have been many religious leaders that claimed to commune with the almighty in order to solicit the servitude of others.  The response often depends on the people though.  When Caligula declared himself not only Emperor of Rome but a living God he was assassinated only a few years later.  Not too many Pharoahs were ever killed by their own guards.  

Many other societies orchestrated their daily lives and choices around omens and sign reading from pagan dieties.  So in that regard their lives would be enslaved if they were prevented from doing something they would otherwise do because their religion suggests it's a bad idea.  It becomes entirely different with modern traditions based on sin as to whether or not certain actions will prevent you from enjoying an afterlife.  Fundamentalism related to texts written hundreds of years ago by relatively uneducated people to modern standards has long been a question of debate.  Especially if they were actually divinely inspired.

Answer 7

Yes I do, and I believe it occurs often, it is called economic slavery and it occurs all over the United States, especially when there are not enough jobs to go around, people accept what they can, and work as slaves for less than what they are truely worth, it is a sad situation, but, it happens.

Answer 8

Yes, and history has proved this time and time again. Even now with the middle east

Answer 9

What does the economy have to do with Religion, Girly Q ?

Answer 10

it depends if the society is formed by  secular and openminded people and then l think any religion can make enslave it but where there are uncultured people then there has to be ENSLAVE .. because you know some people use religions for their bad aims therefore l said this.. hope you catch me

Answer 11

Any beleif system can  create inequality for those that follow it. But many religions are oppressive and so I would say enslave those that follow it. Most practice male dominance and participate in rituals that see their beliefs as superior to other peoples beliefs many of their rituals and beliefs are based on fear which would alien itself with slavery.

Answer 12

Religion can enslave those with minds weak enough to follow and not tell the difference between religion and faith in God. Those enslaved are enslaved to beliefs and they refuse to divert from such beliefs. Their ways are set and they are right no matter what anyone says. They never keep and open mind to ideas and try to think outside of the box.

Answer 13

Not in and of itself.

I think religion is basically just a way (albeit misguided) to try to understand and control aspects of the universe that affect us.

It can , however, very easily be used as a political tool for control. And often is ;(

Answer 14

I must admit your question caused me to pause ... and then compelled me to attempt a reply.

My knee-jerk response to your question is, "that depends."

That is, it depends on how you prefer to define the three separate concepts of i) religion, ii) enslave, and iii) society.  As such, because I don't know your perspectives or working definitions for those concepts, I'll provide my assumptions to help understand my point-of-view, and my answer.

The concept of religion is as old as human nature and, in my view, blossomed from a need (or desire) for our fledgling species to "make sense" of the surroundings -including what, at that point in human history- probably was considered supernatural (from the animal kingdom to the rising and setting of the sun; from rain, sleet, and snow to breezes that become hurricanes; from gazing above and seeing what we now call the "little dipper" to the infinite array of stars that seem to be everywhere in the night sky).  

This view does not pledge allegiance to a divine being who scripted the polices and rules and "handed them down" as we so often see in the readings on the "history of religion."  On the contrary, this view is a simple and direct approach to examining and speculating on the underpinnings of religion long before the term "religion" came into use.

This -if I may- evolution of our species compelled a simultaneous evolution of awareness and thought about the environment.  At some point, what was fragmented and displaced in those early times became more cohesive -and coherent- over time.  Eventually, the accumulated bodies of knowledge, as well as progressive and relentless curiosity and questions, lead to the formation of what came to be known as religion.

As such, then, as is now, the different bodies of knowledge attracted followers who, by affirmation of the knowledge acquired and proclimed, formed what can only be considered small, diverse enclaves that signified their values and beliefs.  At this point in history, those values and beliefs are still largely in response to the natural environment.

Eventually, formal institutions were founded to encourage and attract "membership" to the particular points-of-view expressed by the various religions and then, somewhere in this evolution (I'm sorry to say I don't have knowledge of the exact dates or historical era), the so-called "church" is born and more profound and elaborate systems are constructed including "sacred scriptures," "oral histories and subjective interpretations" and, eventually formal ceremonies that distinguished one church (religion) from the other.

That, for me, is the basis of my assumption for the concept of "religion."

Next comes "enslave."  I will not spend nearly as much time on this ... and for that purpose, simply move to a dictionary definition: generally to be enslave connote some form of servitude -and that implies some level of ownership as in the property of and subject to another; another level of the same term is to be under the domination of some influence.  From a simple economic perspective where a slave is free labor, then the synonyms are toil, labor, slog, or grind.  

Please know that my assumption does no consider the word "enslave" from the economic perspective but much more so from the psychological and spiritual perspective -especially as it relates to your question.

In short, religion asks human beings to accept -unconditionally- a set of values, tenets, beliefs, etc. that, generally speaking, are outside the realm of what we currently understand about human experience.  As such, the basis of subscribing to one religion or another is considered "faith."

It seems reasonable (to me anyway) that when we ask humans to place their "faith" in something, we are truly asking them to suspend the totality of their human experiences for something they cannot comprehend, articulate, verify, or even empirically provide example of.  As such, "faith" seems to be a euphemism for the "suspension of reason."  And, by default, if religion is predicated on faith, then it seems as if a person -or many persons- could most certainly be "enslaved" by religion.

Next comes "society."  It is an entity unto itself that, at it's basis, is a network of relationships (social) that have specific (or indigenous) phenomena that classifies the smaller series of networks within the larger sphere of the culture (or, depending on one's perspective, simply within a larger context of life).   As such, religion is a society.

I believe -for purposes of understanding my assumption about the concept of society- that a bit more is needed ... flashback to the historical period known as the Enlightment.  At hat point in human development, "thought" was considered to founded on the concept of "reason," and the method of reason is generally accepted as anlaytical "reduction" where complex wholes are broken-down (reduced) to least-common-denominators (fundamental particles) and then reassembled via "deduction."

For a given society, the individual is the particle and each individual then uses her/his reason to rationally pursue chosen ends.

With my three assumptions in mind, I return to your original question, "Do you believe that a religion can enslave a society" and I answer without hesitation, YES!