so why don't you have religion?

[miss fortune]

I sometimes think it'd be nice to be religious just so I could have a set place where people with similar values congregate on a regular basis. That, and religious folks apparently live longer, happier lives. But I don't really have 'faith' in anything, let alone a 'God'.

I have an entire thread on that... however, I fear that my belief mechanism is broken

 

[Beargryllz]

That is why the fasci, or the bound bundle of sticks, is the symbol of Fascism.

Would it be correct to say that Fascists are represented by faggots?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascist_symbolism

 

[Coriolis]

So religion has been replaced by spirituality.

I thought it has been replaced by theatre (or at least that's what you said earlier).

 

[animenagai]

You're right, I really should start one of those.

 

[Aquarelle]

I believe that religion teaches a lot of things that are ethically wrong (homophobia, absolute certainty that "our" way is right and everyone else is wrong, etc), which ultimately caused me to become dissilusioned with and reject organized religion. Ironically, since I was raised religious, I was raised to believe that if one believes in God, one by default must believe the Bible, and that you can't agree with some parts of the Bible and not others.

Well, I firmly believe that some parts of the Bible are absolutely true and relevent, but that others are no longer relevant in today's society, and are even detrimental. The fact that I firmly believe that some of the advice/edicts in the Bible are absolutely ethically correct, and that others are absolutely ethically wrong is a big factor leading me to question God's existence.

Religion is responsible for a hell of a lot of bad things in the world. Lots of good things, too, undoubtedly, but I couldn't deal with the bad anymore.

 

[Beargryllz]

I believe that religion teaches a lot of things that are ethically wrong

If you believe a religion is wrong, then it is wrong.

You should not believe in something that is wrong.

 

[Mole]

Not as we know it

I believe that religion teaches a lot of things that are ethically wrong (homophobia, absolute certainty that "our" way is right and everyone else is wrong, etc), which ultimately caused me to become dissilusioned with and reject organized religion. Ironically, since I was raised religious, I was raised to believe that if one believes in God, one by default must believe the Bible, and that you can't agree with some parts of the Bible and not others.

Well, I firmly believe that some parts of the Bible are absolutely true and relevent, but that others are no longer relevant in today's society, and are even detrimental. The fact that I firmly believe that some of the advice/edicts in the Bible are absolutely ethically correct, and that others are absolutely ethically wrong is a big factor leading me to question God's existence.

Religion is responsible for a hell of a lot of bad things in the world. Lots of good things, too, undoubtedly, but I couldn't deal with the bad anymore.

Consider, dear Aquarelle, you are a member of a spiritual group called Central. We are organised round descriptions of the personality. And like church, we are place where we naturally gather.

We have our ethical rules set out in some detall and enforced by our moderators, perhaps called elders or clergy in church.

And we have our bible, "Personality Types", by our founder and inspiration, Carl Jung.

Most of us believe in personal growth and we believe we can help each other to grow and develop as persons and as members of our community.

We even have dissenters and unbelievers who we treat with tolerance.

And our very name 'Central' finds our centre everywhere - for wherever we are, there is Central.

And just think, dear Aquarelle, you are a significant part of Central.

- And Central is a religion, Jim, but not a religion as we know it.

 

[Lark]

I believe that religion teaches a lot of things that are ethically wrong (homophobia, absolute certainty that "our" way is right and everyone else is wrong, etc), which ultimately caused me to become dissilusioned with and reject organized religion. Ironically, since I was raised religious, I was raised to believe that if one believes in God, one by default must believe the Bible, and that you can't agree with some parts of the Bible and not others.

Well, I firmly believe that some parts of the Bible are absolutely true and relevent, but that others are no longer relevant in today's society, and are even detrimental. The fact that I firmly believe that some of the advice/edicts in the Bible are absolutely ethically correct, and that others are absolutely ethically wrong is a big factor leading me to question God's existence.

Religion is responsible for a hell of a lot of bad things in the world. Lots of good things, too, undoubtedly, but I couldn't deal with the bad anymore.

There is no religion in the world which teaches "homophobia" because homophobia is the supposed phobic reaction to homosexual acts and homosexuality, if it exists and there's as much reason to suppose its a political idea from within the psychoanalytical culture wars on the approving, as opposed to disapproving, side of developmental psychology.

If I'm to understand you then contemporaneous respect and valuing of homosexual behaviour has led you to doubt the existence of God, got to say that doesnt particularly endear me to homosexuals and their cause. That's exactly the sort of devastating paradigm shift I've predicted or seen emerging from the whole gay rights idea. In reality it corresponds to the choices of a small number of individuals but its impact is far beyond that population.

The passages in the bible, and I dont believe that any religious scriptures are synonymous with religion, if they are then that religion is dead and the scriptures are its head stone, have been seriously misrepresented. Deliberately so most of the time. There is an agenda. Religious are the dehumanised and villified "other", if you want to consider the other thread on that topic. Now perhaps this is a cyclical thing but presently, even making an allowance for the worst representatives, religion is more sinned against than sinning.

The crimes which are often identified with homosexuality in the bible by modern readers are synonymous with rape and torture, its not about same sex attraction, the whole question of whether or not that is normal or abnormal has a history apart from religion, of course it entered into religion because religion was the main narrative or cultural channel before secularism, politics and pluralism permitted the diversity of thinking which exists today. In times past it would have been difficult to think about anything quite apart from religion or with reference to that. Therefore religion is often saddled with blame for cultural norms and values. Despite even the universality of Roman Catholicism and Christendom before the schisms and reformation fragmenting there was still a high degree of national and regional diversity.

The study of taboos on homosexuality is unlike the study of other taboos on sexual behaviour because of the history. Unless a deliberate bias is adopted condemning the taboo and condoning its breech yesterday and today its virtually impossible to examine and it would eschew any possible research if it where adopted.

The other idea of "our way is right and your way is wrong", I've got to say, what is wrong with that? I mean if everyone did not agree to drive on one side of the road there would be traffic chaos and that is only one example of accepting a single correct way of doing things, its one of the things which worries me about the modern non-judgemental mindset is that so often shuns any certainty and conviction but unconsciously has become so fierce about its norms and values as to make any discussion of them difficult.

 

[Lark]

If you believe a religion is wrong, then it is wrong.

You should not believe in something that is wrong.

Do you mean ethically wrong or untrue?

 

[Lark]

The highlighted escapes me. I just know that darkness is as much a part of the creation as light, and just as essential for balance in the world.

Whether you believe that or not it remains that darkness IS darkness and light IS light and you do not confuse the one for the other. I believe that this age I'm living in has most things confused. That's one way of putting it and I could have said it was an age that things night is day.

My point was that all the buzz words which are liable to get the cultural liberal fired up and infuriated, which they will use to distinguish between their own "good religion" or "good beliefs" and the "other kind", are labels I'm not worried being attached to my self and my beliefs.

 

[Lark]

I'm using the definition of organized religion = religion for this thread

and what do I believe in? protect others, be there for those who are important to me, live

That's a good paradigm as far as it goes Whatever, although "do no harm" cant be the whole of medicine, and I'd find that insufficient.

I'd suspect that most people who have no religion have a substitute of some kind, it provides a lot and gets little credit, it possible to live without it but I believe it would be such a different life. Have you ever read Jung's more spiritual or religious reflections? Like Modern Man in Search of His Soul? Eric Bettelheim (spelling) has write a brilliant book about the mistranslation of Freud which explains how those two could have had an intellectual partnership, I'd often wondered since one is religious and the other the archetypical atheist.

Although its altogether possible to have beliefs, including religious ones, and not practice them.

 

[Lark]

Would it be correct to say that Fascists are represented by faggots?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascist_symbolism

Did Victor do his whole Religion = Fascism thing again?

Sometimes I think if I hear that often enough I'm going to start and become interested in fascism.

 

[tinker683]

Ultimately because I've yet to need it.

Mind you of course I'm going by the definition of religion = organized faith and such. Spirituality is something I've begun to re-explore lately and my journey currently has me exploring Daoism. I went back to my Lutheran church a few times but re-remembered the issues I had with Christianity so now I've begun moving about elsewhere. Perhaps I'll eventually settle on a "God" concept, perhaps not. There are somethings I do take on "faith" so I do understand that aspect of religion.

I don't have anything against religious people as a whole: I think they're good people just trying to live the best life they can. Just because they have different conclusions than I do does not necessarily make them good or bad people, just people with a different opinion. Shitheads are shitheads though and will find whatever justification they can for their own douchebaggery be it God, science, or what have you.

 

[Aquarelle]

There is no religion in the world which teaches "homophobia" because homophobia is the supposed phobic reaction to homosexual acts and homosexuality, if it exists and there's as much reason to suppose its a political idea from within the psychoanalytical culture wars on the approving, as opposed to disapproving, side of developmental psychology.

If I'm to understand you then contemporaneous respect and valuing of homosexual behaviour has led you to doubt the existence of God, got to say that doesnt particularly endear me to homosexuals and their cause. That's exactly the sort of devastating paradigm shift I've predicted or seen emerging from the whole gay rights idea. In reality it corresponds to the choices of a small number of individuals but its impact is far beyond that population.

The passages in the bible, and I dont believe that any religious scriptures are synonymous with religion, if they are then that religion is dead and the scriptures are its head stone, have been seriously misrepresented. Deliberately so most of the time. There is an agenda. Religious are the dehumanised and villified "other", if you want to consider the other thread on that topic. Now perhaps this is a cyclical thing but presently, even making an allowance for the worst representatives, religion is more sinned against than sinning.

The crimes which are often identified with homosexuality in the bible by modern readers are synonymous with rape and torture, its not about same sex attraction, the whole question of whether or not that is normal or abnormal has a history apart from religion, of course it entered into religion because religion was the main narrative or cultural channel before secularism, politics and pluralism permitted the diversity of thinking which exists today. In times past it would have been difficult to think about anything quite apart from religion or with reference to that. Therefore religion is often saddled with blame for cultural norms and values. Despite even the universality of Roman Catholicism and Christendom before the schisms and reformation fragmenting there was still a high degree of national and regional diversity.

The study of taboos on homosexuality is unlike the study of other taboos on sexual behaviour because of the history. Unless a deliberate bias is adopted condemning the taboo and condoning its breech yesterday and today its virtually impossible to examine and it would eschew any possible research if it where adopted.

The other idea of "our way is right and your way is wrong", I've got to say, what is wrong with that? I mean if everyone did not agree to drive on one side of the road there would be traffic chaos and that is only one example of accepting a single correct way of doing things, its one of the things which worries me about the modern non-judgemental mindset is that so often shuns any certainty and conviction but unconsciously has become so fierce about its norms and values as to make any discussion of them difficult.

It's not just the stance toward homosexuality. It's a lot of things. I don't have a problem with religion on its own, but blind, unquestioning adherence to it can be problematic. I'm not vilifying or dehumanizing anyone. Quite the opposite, in fact-- religious adherents have brains, and they should use them to think critically about what they're taught in church, not just accept it blindly. Some do, of course, but I would say that at least in the US, the vast majority of the religious right do not. Lark, I know you've thought critically about your beliefs, and although I still disagree with some of the beliefs you hold, I can respect that you have a right to your own opinion.

As for the Bible thing, again, I think that has to do with critical thinking. You don't believe in all of it, if I understand you correctly. That's exactly how I feel-- some of it is true and relevant, some of it is blatantly wrong. It's just that in the religion I was raised in (Assembly of God) we were taught that you can't pick and choose what parts of God's word you believe, so even now, after having rejected that religion, I have trouble with the idea of only agreeing with some parts. That's really more where my conflict comes from... the issue with homosexuality is only ONE of the things that the Bible teaches that I believe is blatantly wrong. There are many others. I don't know if what you say is correct, that religion isn't historically responsible for the taboo against homosexuality. You are better versed in religious history than I am, so I'll take your word for it. But be that as it may, I don't find history particularly relevant to this argument-- some (many) religions nowadays specifically teach that homosexuality is wrong, and today is what concerns me.

From my early religious education: God exists and is perfect and all powerful. He doesn't make mistakes-->The Bible is God's Word. It was written by men, but dictated by God.-->God wrote the Bible and he doesn't make mistakes or change his mind, therefore everything in the Bible is and always will be true and relevant.

My critical thinking: Some teachings in the Bible are true and relevant; others are ethically wrong.-->Therefore, the Bible is not infallible nor timeless.-->Therefore God must not be perfect.-->Can an imperfect God really exist?

See what I mean?

EDIt: To add this part:
As for the "I'm right, you're wrong" thing, my line of work is all about teaching respect for cultural difference. I am, again, all-or-nothing on that one. It's easy to respect that people of other cultures like different foods and wear different clothes. It's a bit harder to respect their different way of going about education, personal distance and or hygiene practices, etc. It's really difficult to respect the treatment of women, systems of justice that are drastically different from mine (sanctioned murder, etc), but again, my personal code of ethics and beliefs doesn't allow me the arrogance of saying where the line between "Different" and "wrong" is. Of course I don't CONDONE the treatment of women in Afghanistan, or sanctioned murder, or things like that. I don't respect the practices themselves. But I respect the right of a culture to determine what is or is not appropriate for themselves.

For example, in the US, we have decided as a culture that driving on the right side of the road is appropriate for ourselves, so our traffic laws were based upon that. I understand you do things differently in the UK and Australia. It feels totally foreign and unnatural to me when I'm in those places, and I have to be really careful not to get hit by cars when crossing the street, but I'm not going to tell you it's wrong.

 

[Riva]

Because I don't need it.

Your Messiah is going to be pissed!

Humanism is more than enough for me.

The most humane belief system provided in the whole thread.

+1

 

[jcloudz]

Morality is a product of reasoning, something the universe lacks. if there was morality living in the inbetween of our day to day lives, than it would have guided the bat away from the back of the head of an innocent childs head who is now mentally disabled.



(waiting for christian to insert "free will" argument)

I dont believe in god and I prefer seeing the world through my Own lens, monocle, this is why I detest religion.

 

[Coriolis]

From my early religious education: God exists and is perfect and all powerful. He doesn't make mistakes-->The Bible is God's Word. It was written by men, but dictated by God.-->God wrote the Bible and he doesn't make mistakes or change his mind, therefore everything in the Bible is and always will be true and relevant.

My critical thinking: Some teachings in the Bible are true and relevant; others are ethically wrong.-->Therefore, the Bible is not infallible nor timeless.-->Therefore God must not be perfect.-->Can an imperfect God really exist?

I would conclude more readily that therefore the Bible is not in fact God's word, it is the creation of humans, some of whom were truly inspired, some of whom were simply reflecting the baser customs or even instincts of their time and culture.

 

[prplchknz]

I don't want it.

 

[Aquarelle]

I would conclude more readily that therefore the Bible is not in fact God's word, it is the creation of humans, some of whom were truly inspired, some of whom were simply reflecting the baser customs or even instincts of their time and culture.

I know; that would be more logical, right? And actually, that is what I think. But somehow I can't get past the link in my mind between the Bible being absolutely true and correct and God being perfect and real. Strange which parts of early education stick in one's mind, and which ones are more easily let go.

 

[jcloudz]

I would conclude more readily that therefore the Bible is not in fact God's word, it is the creation of humans, some of whom were truly inspired, some of whom were simply reflecting the baser customs or even instincts of their time and culture.

. its fallible and fallibility is human.