There is a very ancient thesis that the only secure foundation for public morality is religion. Moreover not just any religion will do -- it must have supernatural being(s) who monitor your behaviour, have standards of right and wrong that you must meet, and who act on how well you meet those standards.-- Evolution and Morality
We are, so to speak, the wayward children of the Gods who are to be loved, to be punished when we are bad, and rewarded when we are good.
Now the important thing for public morality is not whether there is such a God or Gods, but that people believe and accept that there are. Without such a guide, people naturally fall into depravity.
Mark that, for the purposes of securing public morality, it does not matter whether the religion is true or not, but only that people believe and accept it.
Let us accept this thesis as a postulate. Let us further accept the maintenance of public morality as a necessity, one that has higher priority than the determination of truth. Indeed, by evolutionary criteria it does. A minimum level of public morality is necessary for survival of a society; intellectual honesty is not.
Under these assumptions, what is the status of evolution? Why it is almost infinitely destructive. The funadmental objection to evolution is to a concept underlying it, the notion that it is permissable to use rational thought to study life and that, where rational thought and religion come into conflict, rational thought takes precedence.
Once such a pernicious concept takes hold, the psychology that permits the unquestioning acceptance of religious belief and its corresponding beneficial effect on behaviour is undermined, to the ultimate detriment of society. In other words:
Intellectual dishonesty in the name of religion is a virtue.
Copyright © 1993 by Richard Harter
Advice from that paradigm of book-banning, indulgence-selling, jew-baby-kidnapping social virtue, the medieval catholic church: the inventor of forced jewish ghettoization, the crusades, the inquisition, the 100 years war, and the wholesale torture, murder or persecution of jews, scientists, witches, Anabaptists, and innumerable other who happened to entertain philosophical disagreements with the Vatican. The institution the burned Geordono Bruno, and imprisoned Galileo for life, even though the persecutors knew they were speaking the truth.
My guess would be that God is vastly ashamed of you.
This statement clearly states that belief in religion is more important than faith and truth. And the author continues with this view and reaches the conclusion that someone other than God must be the enforcer of their version of the belief in order to have a functional society. Even if it means hiding the truth and lying to the beleivers in orer to maintain their spiritual welfare. By lying, the foundation of a moral society becomes cracked and the people guiding religion become hypocrites, the Scribes and Pharasees, that Jesus held in contempt. The very statement that intellectual dishonest in the name of religion is a virtueot only condones lies, it says they are good. This crosses the line and that faith must be apostate.