Skip to main content

The Problem of Performative Kindness

 To strive to be "good" for God, in order to prove oneself worthy of salvation, is to engage in a performative act of kindness. 

Performative acts of kindness are not genuine acts of kindness, because they are motivated less by a selfless desire to help someone, and more out of a need for approval for helping someone in need. 

This is like only helping someone if there is someone around to film it so you can put it on your social media feed in an attempt to attract "likes" and followers. So to, to believe that God is watching our actions to determine we are worthy of salvation, which is like a boss watching our actions to determine whether we should be promoted or fired or a dictator determining whether we should be left alone or imprisoned for thinking the "wrong ideas," is not only to rely on such a perspective to motivate us into "right" or moral behavior, it is to assume that without such motivation, people's natural tendency is to act like rapists and serial killers. Such an 'assumption' is based not on a "love" of God, but a fear of others.

Christianity, as such, is a religion that uses acts of kindness exercised by Christians as evidence of how Christianity makes people more altruistic.  But on the one hand, Christians also disclaim all of the horrible actions performed and justified in the name of Christianity as simply being mere mistakes, while on the other hand, Christians discredit all of the altruistic acts of other religions and atheists as being either insignificant, or largely self-serving (how ironic).

The problem is that people conditioned to equate actions with a group or "church" or community approval are highly susceptible to equating actions that are approved of by a community or church as being "moral," even when the whole community is burning witches and crucifying heretics. Then, in retrospect, later group members simply "forgive" the actions of previous Christians as simply proof that we are all flawed and thus need Christianity. 

This, of course, is circular logic masquerading as "divine revelation," which is like the man behind the curtain pretending to be the Wizard of Oz.  

Whenever we are engaging in an action that is dependent upon a reward or approval from a God or a group, we are engaging in performative art masquerading as altruism. 

Between acts of kindness that are engaged in without expectation of reward or approval and acts of kindness that are in anyway related to or connected with approval of worthiness, the former is morally superior, even as a belief in the Christian brand of God holds up the latter as the moral ideal. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why Christianity is More Unnatural Than Homosexuality

I grew up in a family that is about as homophobic as Phil Robertson and the Westboro Baptists, only they're not quite as boisterous about it; at least not in public anyway. They have also conveniently convinced themselves  that their homophobia is really just their unique Christian ability to "hate the sin, but love the sinner" (even though these very same Christians adamantly refuse to accept that people can "hate Christianity, but love the Christian").  The sexual superiority complex necessarily relied on by such Christians is, of course, blanketed beneath the lambs wool of the Christian humility of serving "God." They interpret their fear of those who are different, in other words, as simply proof of their intimate knowledge and love of God. And the only thing such Christians are more sure about than that their own personal version of "God" exists, is that such a "God" would never want people to be homosexual - no matter how ma...
  The world changes according to the way people see it, and if you alter even by a millimeter the way people look at reality, then you can change it.” James Baldwin   

Why Are Republicans Pro Life?

Most people don't realize that the Supreme Court has been in the hands of the Republican party since at least 1970! In fact, even in the landmark case of Roe v Wade that legalized abortion, SCOTUS was inhabited by 6 Republicans and 3 Democrats, and the vote was 7 to 2. One of the reasons is that the Republican Party has absolutely ZERO desire to win on the abortion issue. And that's because abortion gives the GOP a clear focal point with potentially unlimited organizing power. And it's an even simpler message to sell than religion, since we are "pro-life." (if that was true, however, they wouldn't be actively trying to repeal healthcare for up to 30 million Americans, nor would they be so pro-gun, pro-war, pro-death penalty, pro welfare cuts, pro- social security cuts, pro- drone strikes, etc). The Republican party officially became "pro-life" in 1976, thanks to Jesse Helms (R-NC). The only reason no serious challenge was brought within the pa...