Role of religion

January 7, 2013 

JEREMY OWEN, Kennewick

I'm not a proponent of organized religion. I've always viewed spirituality as a personal subject of which a middle man only clouds the issue. But as an observer of history, I'm led to an inescapable conclusion.

Faith is necessary.

I've yet to see a secular society compare to the morality, ethics and advancement that a civilization based on faith can achieve. It begs the question: Are people capable of morality without faith? For those who answered yes, where did you learn your morals?

While I am all for redefining standards and interpretations of spiritual dogma (I believe it's our role) what is the line between redefining and outright rejection? I fear we are crossing those lines.

There is no denying that without religion we would not have achieved the standard of living that we have today. With that in mind, should we reject those traditions?

The only ethical leaps mankind has made in 5,000 years of recorded history is that women deserve an equal voice and owning people is wrong. Are we to dismiss the rest of what religion offers in lieu of those omissions?

Do you think it's time to replace God with a committee?

Tri-City Herald is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

Commenting FAQs | Terms of Service