We are told all the time that religious morality is superior to secular morality because there is an authority behind religious morality and that it is absolute. But if it is absolute, how come it keeps changing according to how societal morality evolve?
Back in the middle ages, it was perfectly moral to torture a witch, warlock, or infidel into confession. During the crusades, it was perfectly moral to for the crusaders to kill every man, woman, and child who lived in Jerusalem. Back during the colonization of the Americas period, it was perfectly moral for conquistadors to wipe out entire cultures. And it was also perfectly moral for missionaries to demolish native places of worship.
Fast forward in time, it was perfectly moral for religious people to justify slavery in America. And after slavery was abolished, it was perfectly moral for people to oppose interracial marriage in the name of god. I now bring you to the following quote.
quote:
Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.
Try to guess who said this and during what occasion.
And nowadays, it is perfectly moral for religious people to openly campaign against the rights of gay people.
You'd think that if religious morality is superior and absolute, there'd be more of a consistency throughout history. But instead, we observe that religious people, particularly christians, pick and choose what to follow in the bible as times and cultures evolve.