When crime is a sin against humanity, an action that goes against the law/a legal concept, sin is a crime against religion, an action that goes against ‘God’, a moral concept.
For example, whereas adultery is not a crime today, it is considered to be a sin- morally wrong.
If we cast our minds back to medieval times, though, then we will see that not only was adultery a crime, but it was punishable by death.
Thankfully, the law was overturned in the UK in 1857 because the courts found adultery to be a private matter in which the state should not intervene.
If ‘private matters’ are not punishable by law, then based on this, surely drugs should be decriminalised too, since our choice to take drugs is exactly that, our choice/a private matter?..
But it’s not.
In fact, only this year a new law was passed in the UK which will stop any child aged 14 or under from ever legally being able to buy cigarettes…
Why?
Why are we being told what we can and can’t do with our bodies?
Who gets to decide, if not ourselves?…
Who decides what is and isn’t against the law?
Who decides what is morally right and wrong?
Who defines sin?
What does the word ‘sin’ even mean?…
Where sin is anything that goes against the commands of God/anything that breaches the laws and norms laid out by society, when the word itself translates to ‘off the mark’, a Greek word to describe ‘a transgression of the law’, the question is;
Who makes the law for which sin is based on?
Who defines crime for which, if we breach, we are guilty of having committed a ‘sin?’
When the passing of laws is the governments responsibility, where does ‘God’ fit into all of this? Unless you think that God was a politician, that Parliament proceeded God?…
When all crime is deemed to be inherently sinful, simply by virtue of one going against authority to do so, surely this is all the evidence we need to see that religion, at its core, is centred on authority- the need for them, the few, to control, whilst we, the masses, blindly, unquestionably, comply…
Religion is simply a vehicle for controlling the masses, using fear to get us to comply/to behave in the ‘right’ way. Whilst there are some countries that are yet to differentiate between crime and sin- those which are stuck in the middle ages, Sharia law, for example, on the whole, as society becomes more secular, as fewer people prescribe to organised religions and more people embrace, either spirituality or existentialism, ‘sins’ have become not legally binding, but morally binding- we are told that we ‘should’ do things by God’s will, however failing to do so is not punishable by law.
‘Not getting a permit to build a shed on your property is not inherently sinful, but if it is required by law, then it becomes sinful to do it by virtue of disobeying just authority.’*
(*Like a higher power would have any knowledge, let alone opinion, on where you build your shed… If it wasn’t the source of so many wars/so much suffering, then our naivety/sheer delusion would be laughable!)
Is getting tattoos a sin? Drinking alcohol? Taking drugs? Being gay?
Why do we say that drug taking is morally wrong/illegal/a ‘sin’, when it is our choice, when it is our body?
Why do we say that sex work is morally wrong,
that eating certain food is morally wrong when, again, it is our body, our choice?
Why do we say that these things are morally wrong, yet the things which genuinely are morally wrong-
war,
exploitation of the poor,
the subordination of women etc-
are not?
( ^ ) Because the lawmakers profit from it, that’s why… And, when law is nothing more than a social construct, the lawmakers can do as they please- whatever suits them goes…
If you need evidence of the fact that law is a social construct, that there is no basis to it, at all, then just look at how quickly laws can be made and demolished…
A few weeks ago, when the supreme court ruled against Britain’s plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda on the basis of it breaching human rights legislations, Rishi Sunak vowed to change the law to ensure that his plans could still go ahead…
Surely denying the human rights of someone is morally wrong, as Britain will be doing if they proceed to send asylum seekers to Rwanda despite it being ruled unlawful?
Apparently not… For, on the basis of any and all law breaking being a sin, to do so must be ‘in God’s will.’
Nonsensical.
Nonsensical like the fact that religion and the government are the two biggest sources of suffering in the world, just think of ISIS killing people in God’s name, and the Israeli government committing an act of genocide against Palestinian’s (death toll= almost 15,000), yet they are also two of the things to which we so blindly conform…
?! Can someone make it make sense ?!
And so, to answer the question posed as the title of this article:
Crime VS Sin: Is There Really A Difference?
The answer…
is no.
There is no difference, both are made by the same people to scare us into conformity.
Both are made to control.
Portfolio of Hope 