Should Governments regulate fraudulent religions?

[Gnostic Bishop]

Should Governments regulate fraudulent religions?

 

https://www.google.ca/search?source=hp&ei=wRyUWquFHcm4tQXV74XQBw&q=fraud+laws&oq=fraud+laws&gs_l=psy-ab.3..0l10.1003.11584.0.15863.10.10.0.0.0.0.114.1040.3j7.10.0....0...1.1.64.psy-ab..0.10.1037...0i131k1.0.nCgTyqsYAOA

 

Fraud is a broad term that refers to a variety of offenses involving dishonesty or "fraudulent acts". In essence, fraud is the intentional deception of a person or entity by another made for monetary or personal gain. Fraud offenses always include some sort of false statement, misrepresentation, or deceitful conduct.

 

Most governments and countries have fraud laws of some kinds. They generally interfere with religious fraudsters only when physical harm is being done to our gullible citizens yet ignore the monetary theft that the fraudsters fleece from their victims. Prosperity ministries are the most flagrant of these immoral religions, but all religions based on demonstrable lies would be included in this question.

 

Our governments are quite good at acting against obvious fraudsters yet seem reluctant to protect our more gullible citizens when it comes down to religions.

 

Religions, to me, get a free pass to lie and steal all they can from victims, especially the older citizens even when governments know about the fraud.

 

I begin to see the inaction of governments on these religious fraudsters as a dereliction of duty.

 

Do you?

 

Regards

DL

[shirgall]

Aren't all systems of belief that require faith for adherence, lack of provision of evidence, and introduce diseases for which only their anointed have cures (at a modest cost) fraudulent?

[barn]

Same as if governments should be put in charge of deciding what amounts to 'wrongthink'. I see no difference whatsoever.

Sustaining free expression, speech, yeah I could see it being somewhat justifiable.

[Gnostic Bishop]

On ‎21‎/‎03‎/‎2018 at 4:52 PM, shirgall said:

Aren't all systems of belief that require faith for adherence, lack of provision of evidence, and introduce diseases for which only their anointed have cures (at a modest cost) fraudulent?

Basically, yes.

I do not mind Gnostic Christianity and other religions that are wisdom and knowledge seekers as they have no need to lie and place man above God where we belong, given that we have created all of them.

Regards

DL

[Gnostic Bishop]

On ‎21‎/‎03‎/‎2018 at 5:30 PM, barn said:

Same as if governments should be put in charge of deciding what amounts to 'wrongthink'. I see no difference whatsoever.

Sustaining free expression, speech, yeah I could see it being somewhat justifiable.

Freedom of speech does not extend to freedom to lie to our weakest and most gullible.

Freedom of speech has always been restricted by the damage it does and fraud directed at our weakest and most gullible is a damage or harm we should try to prevent.

Regards

DL

 

[barn]

Hi @Gnostic Bishop

 

6 hours ago, Gnostic Bishop said:

Freedom of speech does not extend to freedom to lie to our weakest and most gullible.

Correct me if I'm mistaken (a genuine ask), but I thought it very well did. Though definitely not being moral or sane to do so, given no imminent harm... same goes for lying by omissions in my opinion, IF you asked me, anyway.

There's been and always will be consequences, I mean.

 

6 hours ago, Gnostic Bishop said:

Freedom of speech has always been restricted by the damage it does

 

To whom are you referring to? Could you name those arbiters?

6 hours ago, Gnostic Bishop said:

and fraud directed at our weakest and most gullible is a damage or harm we should try to prevent.

Fully agree, the more integrity and virtuous, the better guidance can then the non-gullible/-weak offer up, if needed.

[Osmotic]

The government should have no ability to regulate any form of expression, especially any expression that is deemed harmful to the well-being of its citizens. People will do what they please and hopefully learn to think for themselves through that process. 

[shirgall]

13 hours ago, Gnostic Bishop said:

I do not mind Gnostic Christianity and other religions that are wisdom and knowledge seekers as they have no need to lie and place man above God where we belong, given that we have created all of them.

Said of the Bible, "This Book is the mind of God, the state of man, the way of salvation, the doom of sinners, and the happiness of believers. Its doctrines are holy, its precepts are binding; its histories are true, and its decisions are immutable."

To me, God is (in the) the mind of man, the answer to inscrutable causes, the solace if the misinformed, the excuse of mealy-mouthed manipulators who, despite their best efforts, are unable to degenerate those who are basically good and mindful of their effects on others.

[RichardY]

2 hours ago, shirgall said:

Said of the Bible, "This Book is the mind of God, the state of man, the way of salvation, the doom of sinners, and the happiness of believers. Its doctrines are holy, its precepts are binding; its histories are true, and its decisions are immutable."

To me, God is (in the) the mind of man, the answer to inscrutable causes, the solace if the misinformed, the excuse of mealy-mouthed manipulators who, despite their best efforts, are unable to degenerate those who are basically good and mindful of their effects on others.

Was thinking recently a lot about what God is on a psychological level. What does Gnosis (Knowledge), Or Even the almighty state supposedly aim to leave out.... Chance. Archetypally God in my mind is Chance, though how to deal with that on a psychological level still thinking about. "The unmoved mover" - Aristotle. Perhaps some kind of Quantum effect, maybe even counteracting entropy. People, perhaps for good reason, do not like to think of chance?

Metaphysically Leibniz Monadology could explain a potential aprori knowledge, although after listening to most of "A History of Western Philosophy"(Bertrand Russel) and hearing the Occams Razor orignal quote, being more along the lines of complex explanations being vanity. I'm inclined to discount monadology. "From dust you came, and to dust you shall return."  Maybe there is some kind of biological apriori (bootup instructions)......,  consciousness itself maybe the result of the quantum effect, allowing a person to conceive of the concept of the infiintesimal point or perfect circle. 

Could a person ever really think of themselves irredemably evil? Was thinking how some people perhaps through faith in God or the good, could be able to resist torture and not be "broken". Perhaps even presenting a kind of challenge to the torturer, similar to people witnessing the crucifixion of Christ, fact or fiction...... Braveheart style. 

 

[shirgall]

People are quite capable of recognizing what they are doing is wrong and doing it anyway. Some even expect to be condemned for it. Some erect massive excuses for it. Most are driven by impulse or expediency, though.