"Many of them are people who would otherwise be in church," Putnam said. "They have the same attitidues and values as people who are in church, but they grew up in a period in which being religious meant being politically conservative, especially on social issues."
This is the part that jumped at me the most, as it's something I been thinking about.
That caught me as well. While it's good that people are falling away for these organizations, it always bothers me that they tend to keep the same stunted moral ideals. Passing from "God says so" to a just-as-dogmatic "it's just so" mentality isn't so hot of a change.
Ah well, baby steps, baby steps.
METAzraeL on
dream a little dream or you could live a little dream
sleep forever if you wish to be a dreamer
You don't go to church for the social aspect, you go because it's your religion and the social aspect is nice. Random idiot going to church every week to pick up chicks is a statistical anomaly.
You can also not go to church and believe in god/whatnot. That's what the article is going on about. Not that people are going atheist in droves, but that they're abandoning churchgoing as a regular thing.
I really just wish surveys asked more specific questions:
• Do you believe in a personal God who hears your prayers?
• If so, on a scale of 1 to 5, how accurately does the Bible describe the God you believe in? The Quran?
1 2 3 4 5 haven't read/don't know
For the most part, I think all "mono" type religions ascribe the same things to their deity, and the social requirements are also all the same, minus some minor variations. That's why I always kind of chuckle at not only the modern western thought of what God is, and also the people who claim that laws and order all come direct from religious teachings, when I would argue it's the exact opposite scenario.
As to younger generations leaving Christianity, I'm not terribly surprised, I really feel that Christianity has completely lost it's way in the states. I do wonder how other religions like Mormonism are doing though.
The mormon church is incredibly tight-lipped about this, but the word going around on several of the exmormon sites I visit is that there's roughly a 45% turnover rate with new converts.
Of course the mormon church still considers these people members until they ask to have their names removed from the church records.
As for people leaving, I can't say to be honest. Never met any other exmos my age.
His research shows that people who go to church are much more likely to vote, volunteer and give to charity.
I'm always skeptical when I hear this. Mostly because I suspect they include volunteering their time and money to the church when they say "volunteer and give to charity".
Given that this can involve stuff like taking care of elderly members of the congregation (bringing them food, driving them to appointments, etc.) or babysitting for working parents I don't see why this is so horrible.
I didn't mean to suggest it's horrible, just that there exists within a church activities that could be used to inflate this figure in a manner that wouldn't necessarily fit with many definitions of "charity work".
I wouldn't consider someone who puts money in the collection plate every sunday to be "giving to charity", neither would I consider someone who volunteers to organise services or similar to be "volunteering".
Others may disagree, of course, but I definitely think it's a statement that can't be taken at face value.
Wait, what? What's the issue here? That kids these days have fewer synaptic misfires than most people in previous generations and realize that participating in what can only be construed as manipulation of the masses is a bad thing?
Hallelujah!
Clarification: I'm talking about Christianity, since that's the only religion with hundreds of millions of followers that is today, in essence, a sham.
You don't go to church for the social aspect, you go because it's your religion and the social aspect is nice. Random idiot going to church every week to pick up chicks is a statistical anomaly.
You can also not go to church and believe in god/whatnot. That's what the article is going on about. Not that people are going atheist in droves, but that they're abandoning churchgoing as a regular thing.
I really just wish surveys asked more specific questions:
• Do you believe in a personal God who hears your prayers?
• If so, on a scale of 1 to 5, how accurately does the Bible describe the God you believe in? The Quran?
1 2 3 4 5 haven't read/don't know
For the most part, I think all "mono" type religions ascribe the same things to their deity, and the social requirements are also all the same, minus some minor variations. That's why I always kind of chuckle at not only the modern western thought of what God is, and also the people who claim that laws and order all come direct from religious teachings, when I would argue it's the exact opposite scenario.
As to younger generations leaving Christianity, I'm not terribly surprised, I really feel that Christianity has completely lost it's way in the states. I do wonder how other religions like Mormonism are doing though.
The mormon church is incredibly tight-lipped about this, but the word going around on several of the exmormon sites I visit is that there's roughly a 45% turnover rate with new converts.
Of course the mormon church still considers these people members until they ask to have their names removed from the church records.
As for people leaving, I can't say to be honest. Never met any other exmos my age.
Doesn't take much for the Mormons to consider you mormon. Hell, they baptize jews killed in the holocaust, as well as Barack Obama's grandmother.
postinonthenets on
Solitude sometimes is best society, and short retirement urges sweet return
Wait, what? What's the issue here? That kids these days have fewer synaptic misfires than most members of older generations and realize that participating in what can only be construed as manipulation of the masses is a bad thing?
Hallelujah!
Clarification: I'm talking about Christianity, since that's the only religion with hundreds of millions of followers that is today, in essence, a sham.
Wait, what? What's the issue here? That kids these days have fewer synaptic misfires than most people in previous generations and realize that participating in what can only be construed as manipulation of the masses is a bad thing?
Hallelujah!
Clarification: I'm talking about Christianity, since that's the only religion with hundreds of millions of followers that is today, in essence, a sham.
What a hilariously ignorant series of things to say!
Wait, what? What's the issue here? That kids these days have fewer synaptic misfires than most people in previous generations and realize that participating in what can only be construed as manipulation of the masses is a bad thing?
Hallelujah!
Clarification: I'm talking about Christianity, since that's the only religion with hundreds of millions of followers that is today, in essence, a sham.
What a hilariously ignorant series of things to say!
Outstanding!
Wait so...only xtianity is a sham? Whats your reasoning on that?
postinonthenets on
Solitude sometimes is best society, and short retirement urges sweet return
American animosity towards Christianity as somehow the worst religion ever or the stick by which all other organized religions should be measured is both hilarious and sad.
Seriously, if people had a better understanding of how Hinduism is actually practiced in a lot of India...
Pony on
0
KalTorakOne way or another, they all end up inthe Undercity.Registered Userregular
American animosity towards Christianity as somehow the worst religion ever or the stick by which all other organized religions should be measured is both hilarious and sad.
Seriously, if people had a better understanding of how Hinduism is actually practiced in a lot of India...
Yeah, as much as i detest Christianity, I have to put it above any religion that thinks it's a good idea to perform clitoridectomies.
Note: that's not a reference to Hinduism (or is it? I don't actually know)
American animosity towards Christianity as somehow the worst religion ever or the stick by which all other organized religions should be measured is both hilarious and sad.
Seriously, if people had a better understanding of how Hinduism is actually practiced in a lot of India...
I think it largely is because in the US, Christianity and its followers are what we have to deal with, are the ones mucking around in government trying to get their beliefs passed as laws, or prevent things which go against their beliefs from getting passed, etc. Yes, Hinduism and Islam both involve a whole lot of shitty practices, discrimination, mistreatment of people, etc...but that largely doesn't affect the lives of Americans, so we don't focus on it.
Vincent Grayson on
0
ApogeeLancks In Every Game EverRegistered Userregular
I think science would make an excellent religion. Just gotta do it right.
QUOTE]
Science would make a great religion! It just needs a catchy name... how about - scientology?
I keed.
Seriously though, I used to be a very religious kid - I lost it mid second year of university after writing a paper for my philsophy class defending the existence of God. After I had written it (got an A, woo), I realized I couldn't justify the argument to myself. Too many assumptions and odd conclusions. Honestly, I'm suprised i got a good mark with all the fudging I did.
American animosity towards Christianity as somehow the worst religion ever or the stick by which all other organized religions should be measured is both hilarious and sad.
Seriously, if people had a better understanding of how Hinduism is actually practiced in a lot of India...
I think it largely is because in the US, Christianity and its followers are what we have to deal with, are the ones mucking around in government trying to get their beliefs passed as laws, or prevent things which go against their beliefs from getting passed, etc. Yes, Hinduism and Islam both involve a whole lot of shitty practices, discrimination, mistreatment of people, etc...but that largely doesn't affect the lives of Americans, so we don't focus on it.
Oh certainly, I totally get why it happens.
It's just that it points to such obvious self-centered thinking that a person who is, in effect, trying to decry ignorance and dogmatic thinking is only giving a shit about things that affect them and they see on a daily basis.
Wait, what? What's the issue here? That kids these days have fewer synaptic misfires than most people in previous generations and realize that participating in what can only be construed as manipulation of the masses is a bad thing?
Hallelujah!
Clarification: I'm talking about Christianity, since that's the only religion with hundreds of millions of followers that is today, in essence, a sham.
What a hilariously ignorant series of things to say!
Outstanding!
Explain please. Are you condoning the killing of millions of innocents "in God's name"? Are you condoning hypocrisy ("The Bible is merely a guideline, and should not be taken ad literam; but don't forget, man shall not lay with man as he does with a woman")? Are you condoning the Catholic Church's response to the HIV epidemic in Africa? Or the fact that the church, in some places, still has a crass disregard for science?
Really?
As for your comment about how Hinduism is practiced in a lot of India.. how does that relate? I wasn't talking about how people, individually, practice their religion, I was talking about the basic tenets of religion, and the way spiritual leaders go about doing business.
I know it's anecdotal evidence, but it seems like I fit in with the idea here. I'm pretty young (currently 21) and moved away from organized religion/Christianity about 5 years ago. My move was connected to the religious right and the merging of conservative social values with Christianity. Eventually all of the hateful things being said by Christians, especially towards homosexuals/bisexuals, made me question my beliefs. When looking closer at many of the beliefs I found I didn't really agree with them either; though I don't have a problem with much of the message Jesus had.
I'm still religious, but in now way ascribe to an organized religion. I've also moved more towards a loose paganism rather than Christianity.
Wait, what? What's the issue here? That kids these days have fewer synaptic misfires than most people in previous generations and realize that participating in what can only be construed as manipulation of the masses is a bad thing?
Hallelujah!
Clarification: I'm talking about Christianity, since that's the only religion with hundreds of millions of followers that is today, in essence, a sham.
What a hilariously ignorant series of things to say!
Outstanding!
Explain please. Are you condoning the killing of millions of innocents "in God's name"? Are you condoning hypocrisy ("The Bible is merely a guideline, and should not be taken ad literam; but don't forget, man shall not lay with man as he does with a woman")? Are you condoning the Catholic Church's response to the HIV epidemic in Africa? Or the fact that the church, in some places, still has a crass disregard for science?
Wait, what? What's the issue here? That kids these days have fewer synaptic misfires than most people in previous generations and realize that participating in what can only be construed as manipulation of the masses is a bad thing?
Hallelujah!
Clarification: I'm talking about Christianity, since that's the only religion with hundreds of millions of followers that is today, in essence, a sham.
Yeah, I don't think anyone on this forum has attacked Christianity as much as I have, but your last statement is pretty hard to swallow.
Maybe historically, but there are not Christian theocracies today; even evangelicals balk at instituting Biblical law when it comes down to it. Whereas the Quran is the constitution in Saudi Arabia and Iran, which have a combined population of 100 million people. Islam likely has more practicing followers than Christianity does today (estimates of 1.5 to 2 billion), a much higher birthrate, and a much higher conversion rate.
It's sort of like in Final Fantasy, where you start out on this one continent fighting some evil kingdom (Christianity) and then it turns out there's this entire fucked up empire over the ocean (Islam) that you also have to fight and has monsters with way more HP.
Edit: I'd like to emphasize that the violence in this analogy does not reflect my views on how to deal with Christians or Muslims. I'm fine with standing in neat lines and throwing white digits at them though.
Explain please. Are you condoning the killing of millions of innocents "in God's name"? Are you condoning hypocrisy ("The Bible is merely a guideline, and should not be taken ad literam; but don't forget, man shall not lay with man as he does with a woman")? Are you condoning the Catholic Church's response to the HIV epidemic in Africa? Or the fact that the church, in some places, still has a crass disregard for science?
Really?
As for your comment about how Hinduism is practiced in a lot of India.. how does that relate? I wasn't talking about how people, individually, practice their religion, I was talking about the basic tenets of religion, and the way spiritual leaders go about doing business.
If you're so profoundly ignorant that you think that "Christianity" (a term so vague that it's essentially meaningless) is the only religion still widely practiced with dirty laundry then I don't know what to tell you.
Are Lutherans responsible for the Crusades? Are Copts responsible for 19th-century pogroms in central germany? Are Armenians responsible for the African AIDS crisis?
Wait, what? What's the issue here? That kids these days have fewer synaptic misfires than most people in previous generations and realize that participating in what can only be construed as manipulation of the masses is a bad thing?
Hallelujah!
Clarification: I'm talking about Christianity, since that's the only religion with hundreds of millions of followers that is today, in essence, a sham.
What a hilariously ignorant series of things to say!
Outstanding!
Explain please. Are you condoning the killing of millions of innocents "in God's name"? Are you condoning hypocrisy ("The Bible is merely a guideline, and should not be taken ad literam; but don't forget, man shall not lay with man as he does with a woman")? Are you condoning the Catholic Church's response to the HIV epidemic in Africa? Or the fact that the church, in some places, still has a crass disregard for science?
Really?
Oh goodness, sir.
Read the posts I've made subsequent!
I'm certainly not above lambasting certain Christian religious institutions for their most clear and egregious crimes against humanity. Far from it!
I'm just trying to impress upon you the sheer hyperbole of your approach to somehow identifying Christianity as not only the worst of the global organized religions (a very heavily arguable point, an argument which I do not care to have I might add!) but also the idea that Christianity exclusively is somehow guilty of these sorts of things and that it features the only religious institutions guilty of gross negligence or outright crimes.
In fact, all of the large global organized religions are, on some level, guilty of having institutions associated with them that historically and even to this day are guilty of some truly heinous acts against mankind.
Even Buddhism, which generally gets a free pass from Westerners as some kind of not-religion that doesn't get to be judged with the others.
I'm all for religion. Just not organized religion, because that's just bullshit. The entire world would be a much, much better place if everyone worshiped their own God in their own home, without trying to push their beliefs on others.
My post didn't refer to Christianity, exclusively. I merely used it as the measuring stick, since it's (imo) the one that has fallen the farthest, by far.
American animosity towards Christianity as somehow the worst religion ever or the stick by which all other organized religions should be measured is both hilarious and sad.
Seriously, if people had a better understanding of how Hinduism is actually practiced in a lot of India...
I think it largely is because in the US, Christianity and its followers are what we have to deal with, are the ones mucking around in government trying to get their beliefs passed as laws, or prevent things which go against their beliefs from getting passed, etc. Yes, Hinduism and Islam both involve a whole lot of shitty practices, discrimination, mistreatment of people, etc...but that largely doesn't affect the lives of Americans, so we don't focus on it.
Oh certainly, I totally get why it happens.
It's just that it points to such obvious self-centered thinking that a person who is, in effect, trying to decry ignorance and dogmatic thinking is only giving a shit about things that affect them and they see on a daily basis.
Well, it's also the only thing they can really, personally affect. There's nothing wrong with fixing your own part of the world before you try to fix everyone else's part of the world.
HamHamJ on
While racing light mechs, your Urbanmech comes in second place, but only because it ran out of ammo.
I'm all for religion. Just not organized religion, because that's just bullshit. The entire world would be a much, much better place if everyone worshiped their own God in their own home, without trying to push their beliefs on others.
I don't think anyone is disagreeing with your sentiment except for the fact that you inexplicably singled out Christianity.
Edit: actually I disagree about being "all for religion." Non-organized bullshit is still bullshit.
American animosity towards Christianity as somehow the worst religion ever or the stick by which all other organized religions should be measured is both hilarious and sad.
Seriously, if people had a better understanding of how Hinduism is actually practiced in a lot of India...
I think it largely is because in the US, Christianity and its followers are what we have to deal with, are the ones mucking around in government trying to get their beliefs passed as laws, or prevent things which go against their beliefs from getting passed, etc. Yes, Hinduism and Islam both involve a whole lot of shitty practices, discrimination, mistreatment of people, etc...but that largely doesn't affect the lives of Americans, so we don't focus on it.
Oh certainly, I totally get why it happens.
It's just that it points to such obvious self-centered thinking that a person who is, in effect, trying to decry ignorance and dogmatic thinking is only giving a shit about things that affect them and they see on a daily basis.
I think this behavior can also be partially attributed to the fact that talking about problems with foreign cultures or religions can sometimes be mistaken for xenophobia. For example, if I was to start up a conversation with people at work about some of the horrible things that have been done in the name of Islam, there'd probably be one or two people who'd label me as some right-wing nut who wants to turn the Middle East into a parking lot. It's simply easier to talk about the problems in our own backyards.
Which is why you can't really separate organised religion and religion. Organised religions is definitely bad and because they tend to naturally organise, religion is bad. There is not a religion on this planet that hasn't turned back because of organisation and the actions of religious leaders.
I'm all for religion. Just not organized religion, because that's just bullshit. The entire world would be a much, much better place if everyone worshiped their own God in their own home, without trying to push their beliefs on others.
And, of course, they should be forbidden from organizing into groups or societies based around their shared beliefs, then?
Is that what you are saying?
Because, while the actions of many religious institutions are often highly dubious, the origin of such institutions is almost universally "a group of like-minded believers come together as a community of common causes and values".
Unless you expressly forbid by law the idea of like-minded believers in common values coming together and creating institutionalized organizations based around their beliefs and cultural values, then it is something that is going to continue to happen.
This sort of idea isn't exclusive to religion, either. People come together and form organizations, with their own politics and deviations and splintering, for pretty much every conceivable thing that more than two people could have in common.
So saying "organized" religion is the problem is absurd, because it suggests that possessing a religious community by its very nature is a deplorable act and is responsible for the abuses of power and influence many religious institutions around the world are guilty of.
I'm all for religion. Just not organized religion, because that's just bullshit. The entire world would be a much, much better place if everyone worshiped their own God in their own home, without trying to push their beliefs on others.
I don't think anyone is disagreeing with your sentiment except for the fact that you inexplicably singled out Christianity.
Edit: actually I disagree about being "all for religion." Non-organized bullshit is still bullshit.
Yes, this. You didn't need to specify xians - all religions are pretty much a blight.
METAzraeL on
dream a little dream or you could live a little dream
sleep forever if you wish to be a dreamer
You don't go to church for the social aspect, you go because it's your religion and the social aspect is nice. Random idiot going to church every week to pick up chicks is a statistical anomaly.
You can also not go to church and believe in god/whatnot. That's what the article is going on about. Not that people are going atheist in droves, but that they're abandoning churchgoing as a regular thing.
I really just wish surveys asked more specific questions:
• Do you believe in a personal God who hears your prayers?
• If so, on a scale of 1 to 5, how accurately does the Bible describe the God you believe in? The Quran?
1 2 3 4 5 haven't read/don't know
For the most part, I think all "mono" type religions ascribe the same things to their deity, and the social requirements are also all the same, minus some minor variations. That's why I always kind of chuckle at not only the modern western thought of what God is, and also the people who claim that laws and order all come direct from religious teachings, when I would argue it's the exact opposite scenario.
As to younger generations leaving Christianity, I'm not terribly surprised, I really feel that Christianity has completely lost it's way in the states. I do wonder how other religions like Mormonism are doing though.
The mormon church is incredibly tight-lipped about this, but the word going around on several of the exmormon sites I visit is that there's roughly a 45% turnover rate with new converts.
Of course the mormon church still considers these people members until they ask to have their names removed from the church records.
As for people leaving, I can't say to be honest. Never met any other exmos my age.
Doesn't take much for the Mormons to consider you mormon. Hell, they baptize jews killed in the holocaust, as well as Barack Obama's grandmother.
As a side note I find this to be one of the most despicably creepy church ideals I have ever come across, and is a siginificant part of their temple rituals. I have half a mind to put in my will that I shall never be baptized into the Mormon church dead or alive, as if that would stop them though.
I would have to say that Buddhism is probably the only religion I can really say I find agreement with because of it's emphasis on the improvement of one's self without convenient excuse and a more general sense of spirituality.
Wait, what? What's the issue here? That kids these days have fewer synaptic misfires than most people in previous generations and realize that participating in what can only be construed as manipulation of the masses is a bad thing?
Hallelujah!
Clarification: I'm talking about Christianity, since that's the only religion with hundreds of millions of followers that is today, in essence, a sham.
What a hilariously ignorant series of things to say!
Outstanding!
Explain please. Are you condoning the killing of millions of innocents "in God's name"? Are you condoning hypocrisy ("The Bible is merely a guideline, and should not be taken ad literam; but don't forget, man shall not lay with man as he does with a woman")? Are you condoning the Catholic Church's response to the HIV epidemic in Africa? Or the fact that the church, in some places, still has a crass disregard for science?
Really?
As for your comment about how Hinduism is practiced in a lot of India.. how does that relate? I wasn't talking about how people, individually, practice their religion, I was talking about the basic tenets of religion, and the way spiritual leaders go about doing business.
Let's see how about:
1. The hilarious way in which you paint all of "Christianity" with a single brush
2. The way you take certain groups' twisting of something and apply it to everyone who espouses that religion
3. The way you ignore how every other religion in the world has horrible people associated with it
4. The way you completely ignored what the "basic tenants" of Christianity are in favor of how people use it to apply wedge issues
I think this behavior can also be partially attributed to the fact that talking about problems with foreign cultures or religions can sometimes be mistaken for xenophobia. For example, if I was to start up a conversation with people at work about some of the horrible things that have been done in the Islam, there'd probably be one or two people who'd label me as some right-wing nut who wants to turn the Middle East into a parking lot. It's simply easier to talk about the problems in our own backyards.
There are definitely some weird liberal Islam apologists who do not extend their "tolerance" for that religion to Christianity.
I actually think it's pretty condescending to Muslims, actually. The underlying idea is that our (Western) culture is supposed to know better, because we're nice and developed and civilized, whereas it's unfair to criticize Islamic culture because they've been shat on by colonialism/are undeveloped children.
I'm all for religion. Just not organized religion, because that's just bullshit. The entire world would be a much, much better place if everyone worshiped their own God in their own home, without trying to push their beliefs on others.
And, of course, they should be forbidden from organizing into groups or societies based around their shared beliefs, then?
Is that what you are saying?
Because, while the actions of many religious institutions are often highly dubious, the origin of such institutions is almost universally "a group of like-minded believers come together as a community of common causes and values".
Unless you expressly forbid by law the idea of like-minded believers in common values coming together and creating institutionalized organizations based around their beliefs and cultural values, then it is something that is going to continue to happen.
This sort of idea isn't exclusive to religion, either. People come together and form organizations, with their own politics and deviations and splintering, for pretty much every conceivable thing that more than two people could have in common.
So saying "organized" religion is the problem is absurd, because it suggests that possessing a religious community by its very nature is a deplorable act and is responsible for the abuses of power and influence many religious institutions around the world are guilty of.
Oh, come on, Pony. What the heck, man? I think every single person posting in this thread knows full well that Christianity doesn't just assemble in churches, hear mass, and go home. If they did just that, I'd be thrilled. What pisses me off is them being involved in politics (what the FUCK?) and trying to change (and to an extent, succeeding in changing) global policies.
I'm all for religion. Just not organized religion, because that's just bullshit. The entire world would be a much, much better place if everyone worshiped their own God in their own home, without trying to push their beliefs on others.
I don't think anyone is disagreeing with your sentiment except for the fact that you inexplicably singled out Christianity.
Edit: actually I disagree about being "all for religion." Non-organized bullshit is still bullshit.
Yes, this. You didn't need to specify xians - all religions are pretty much a blight.
See, obviously, as a religious person myself I completely disagree with this sort of viewpoint.
However, such a viewpoint that religion by its very nature is harmful or negative can at least be internally consistent, even if it can be demonstrated to be false or not universally applicable.
Trying to define a line between "organized" and "personal" religion and saying that one is bad and the other is good based exclusively around the idea of whether or not it's "organized" or not is an illogical and absurd idea that no person holding to a pretense of rational behavior should subscribe to.
His research shows that people who go to church are much more likely to vote, volunteer and give to charity.
I'm always skeptical when I hear this. Mostly because I suspect they include volunteering their time and money to the church when they say "volunteer and give to charity".
Given that this can involve stuff like taking care of elderly members of the congregation (bringing them food, driving them to appointments, etc.) or babysitting for working parents I don't see why this is so horrible.
I didn't mean to suggest it's horrible, just that there exists within a church activities that could be used to inflate this figure in a manner that wouldn't necessarily fit with many definitions of "charity work".
I wouldn't consider someone who puts money in the collection plate every sunday to be "giving to charity", neither would I consider someone who volunteers to organise services or similar to be "volunteering".
Others may disagree, of course, but I definitely think it's a statement that can't be taken at face value.
And bearing in mind that, as they say, past performance doesn't denote future success; it's hard to extrapolate the notion of churchgoers being more likely to vote, volunteer, and give to charity given that the younger generation is presently more likely to vote, volunteer, and give to charity than any other generation outside of the Greatest Generation. So clearly the two are becoming decoupled if both of his findings are true. Which is great, because you're going to want a lot of people to vote, volunteer, and give to charity regardless of how religious a society you are.
moniker on
0
KalTorakOne way or another, they all end up inthe Undercity.Registered Userregular
As a side note I find this to be one of the most despicably creepy church ideals I have ever come across, and is a siginificant part of their temple rituals. I have half a mind to put in my will that I shall never be baptized into the Mormon church dead or alive, as if that would stop them though.
What I do is baptize all dead Mormons into Satan's Church of Outer Darkness.
I would have to say that Buddhism is probably the only religion I can really say I find agreement with because of it's emphasis on the improvement of one's self without convenient excuse and a more general sense of spirituality.
See, Buddhism has shit too. Samurai trained in Buddhism to learn how to detach so they could kill people better. The Dalai Lama seems like a nice man and all, but Tibet is actually kind of fucked up; it's basically a feudal society reliant on a quasi-dynastic priesthood (dynastic in that the priests get to choose their successors).
And the philosophy of Buddhism also has problems, though I'm admittingly not as familiar with it as Abrahamic stuff. But detachment from the world is not, actually, a good philosophy.
Posts
Ah well, baby steps, baby steps.
dream a little dream or you could live a little dream
sleep forever if you wish to be a dreamer
The mormon church is incredibly tight-lipped about this, but the word going around on several of the exmormon sites I visit is that there's roughly a 45% turnover rate with new converts.
Of course the mormon church still considers these people members until they ask to have their names removed from the church records.
As for people leaving, I can't say to be honest. Never met any other exmos my age.
The Pipe Vault|Twitter|Steam|Backloggery|3DS:1332-7703-1083
I didn't mean to suggest it's horrible, just that there exists within a church activities that could be used to inflate this figure in a manner that wouldn't necessarily fit with many definitions of "charity work".
I wouldn't consider someone who puts money in the collection plate every sunday to be "giving to charity", neither would I consider someone who volunteers to organise services or similar to be "volunteering".
Others may disagree, of course, but I definitely think it's a statement that can't be taken at face value.
Hallelujah!
Clarification: I'm talking about Christianity, since that's the only religion with hundreds of millions of followers that is today, in essence, a sham.
Doesn't take much for the Mormons to consider you mormon. Hell, they baptize jews killed in the holocaust, as well as Barack Obama's grandmother.
Twitter
What a hilariously ignorant series of things to say!
Outstanding!
Wait so...only xtianity is a sham? Whats your reasoning on that?
Twitter
Seriously, if people had a better understanding of how Hinduism is actually practiced in a lot of India...
Yeah, as much as i detest Christianity, I have to put it above any religion that thinks it's a good idea to perform clitoridectomies.
Note: that's not a reference to Hinduism (or is it? I don't actually know)
I think it largely is because in the US, Christianity and its followers are what we have to deal with, are the ones mucking around in government trying to get their beliefs passed as laws, or prevent things which go against their beliefs from getting passed, etc. Yes, Hinduism and Islam both involve a whole lot of shitty practices, discrimination, mistreatment of people, etc...but that largely doesn't affect the lives of Americans, so we don't focus on it.
Oh certainly, I totally get why it happens.
It's just that it points to such obvious self-centered thinking that a person who is, in effect, trying to decry ignorance and dogmatic thinking is only giving a shit about things that affect them and they see on a daily basis.
Explain please. Are you condoning the killing of millions of innocents "in God's name"? Are you condoning hypocrisy ("The Bible is merely a guideline, and should not be taken ad literam; but don't forget, man shall not lay with man as he does with a woman")? Are you condoning the Catholic Church's response to the HIV epidemic in Africa? Or the fact that the church, in some places, still has a crass disregard for science?
Really?
As for your comment about how Hinduism is practiced in a lot of India.. how does that relate? I wasn't talking about how people, individually, practice their religion, I was talking about the basic tenets of religion, and the way spiritual leaders go about doing business.
I'm still religious, but in now way ascribe to an organized religion. I've also moved more towards a loose paganism rather than Christianity.
Maybe historically, but there are not Christian theocracies today; even evangelicals balk at instituting Biblical law when it comes down to it. Whereas the Quran is the constitution in Saudi Arabia and Iran, which have a combined population of 100 million people. Islam likely has more practicing followers than Christianity does today (estimates of 1.5 to 2 billion), a much higher birthrate, and a much higher conversion rate.
It's sort of like in Final Fantasy, where you start out on this one continent fighting some evil kingdom (Christianity) and then it turns out there's this entire fucked up empire over the ocean (Islam) that you also have to fight and has monsters with way more HP.
Edit: I'd like to emphasize that the violence in this analogy does not reflect my views on how to deal with Christians or Muslims. I'm fine with standing in neat lines and throwing white digits at them though.
Are Lutherans responsible for the Crusades? Are Copts responsible for 19th-century pogroms in central germany? Are Armenians responsible for the African AIDS crisis?
Oh goodness, sir.
Read the posts I've made subsequent!
I'm certainly not above lambasting certain Christian religious institutions for their most clear and egregious crimes against humanity. Far from it!
I'm just trying to impress upon you the sheer hyperbole of your approach to somehow identifying Christianity as not only the worst of the global organized religions (a very heavily arguable point, an argument which I do not care to have I might add!) but also the idea that Christianity exclusively is somehow guilty of these sorts of things and that it features the only religious institutions guilty of gross negligence or outright crimes.
In fact, all of the large global organized religions are, on some level, guilty of having institutions associated with them that historically and even to this day are guilty of some truly heinous acts against mankind.
Even Buddhism, which generally gets a free pass from Westerners as some kind of not-religion that doesn't get to be judged with the others.
Compelling argument.
I'm all for religion. Just not organized religion, because that's just bullshit. The entire world would be a much, much better place if everyone worshiped their own God in their own home, without trying to push their beliefs on others.
My post didn't refer to Christianity, exclusively. I merely used it as the measuring stick, since it's (imo) the one that has fallen the farthest, by far.
Well, it's also the only thing they can really, personally affect. There's nothing wrong with fixing your own part of the world before you try to fix everyone else's part of the world.
Edit: actually I disagree about being "all for religion." Non-organized bullshit is still bullshit.
I think this behavior can also be partially attributed to the fact that talking about problems with foreign cultures or religions can sometimes be mistaken for xenophobia. For example, if I was to start up a conversation with people at work about some of the horrible things that have been done in the name of Islam, there'd probably be one or two people who'd label me as some right-wing nut who wants to turn the Middle East into a parking lot. It's simply easier to talk about the problems in our own backyards.
Garbage in, garbage out.
Which is why you can't really separate organised religion and religion. Organised religions is definitely bad and because they tend to naturally organise, religion is bad. There is not a religion on this planet that hasn't turned back because of organisation and the actions of religious leaders.
Pickles the Drummer does not approve.
Going to church is a demonstration of commitment. And I'm not committed. Fuck that shit.
And, of course, they should be forbidden from organizing into groups or societies based around their shared beliefs, then?
Is that what you are saying?
Because, while the actions of many religious institutions are often highly dubious, the origin of such institutions is almost universally "a group of like-minded believers come together as a community of common causes and values".
Unless you expressly forbid by law the idea of like-minded believers in common values coming together and creating institutionalized organizations based around their beliefs and cultural values, then it is something that is going to continue to happen.
This sort of idea isn't exclusive to religion, either. People come together and form organizations, with their own politics and deviations and splintering, for pretty much every conceivable thing that more than two people could have in common.
So saying "organized" religion is the problem is absurd, because it suggests that possessing a religious community by its very nature is a deplorable act and is responsible for the abuses of power and influence many religious institutions around the world are guilty of.
dream a little dream or you could live a little dream
sleep forever if you wish to be a dreamer
As a side note I find this to be one of the most despicably creepy church ideals I have ever come across, and is a siginificant part of their temple rituals. I have half a mind to put in my will that I shall never be baptized into the Mormon church dead or alive, as if that would stop them though.
I would have to say that Buddhism is probably the only religion I can really say I find agreement with because of it's emphasis on the improvement of one's self without convenient excuse and a more general sense of spirituality.
Let's see how about:
1. The hilarious way in which you paint all of "Christianity" with a single brush
2. The way you take certain groups' twisting of something and apply it to everyone who espouses that religion
3. The way you ignore how every other religion in the world has horrible people associated with it
4. The way you completely ignored what the "basic tenants" of Christianity are in favor of how people use it to apply wedge issues
I actually think it's pretty condescending to Muslims, actually. The underlying idea is that our (Western) culture is supposed to know better, because we're nice and developed and civilized, whereas it's unfair to criticize Islamic culture because they've been shat on by colonialism/are undeveloped children.
Oh, come on, Pony. What the heck, man? I think every single person posting in this thread knows full well that Christianity doesn't just assemble in churches, hear mass, and go home. If they did just that, I'd be thrilled. What pisses me off is them being involved in politics (what the FUCK?) and trying to change (and to an extent, succeeding in changing) global policies.
Painting critics of religion as "intolerant"—as if we want to outlaw religion—is annoying as hell.
See, obviously, as a religious person myself I completely disagree with this sort of viewpoint.
However, such a viewpoint that religion by its very nature is harmful or negative can at least be internally consistent, even if it can be demonstrated to be false or not universally applicable.
Trying to define a line between "organized" and "personal" religion and saying that one is bad and the other is good based exclusively around the idea of whether or not it's "organized" or not is an illogical and absurd idea that no person holding to a pretense of rational behavior should subscribe to.
THOSE BASTARDS.
And bearing in mind that, as they say, past performance doesn't denote future success; it's hard to extrapolate the notion of churchgoers being more likely to vote, volunteer, and give to charity given that the younger generation is presently more likely to vote, volunteer, and give to charity than any other generation outside of the Greatest Generation. So clearly the two are becoming decoupled if both of his findings are true. Which is great, because you're going to want a lot of people to vote, volunteer, and give to charity regardless of how religious a society you are.
See, Buddhism has shit too. Samurai trained in Buddhism to learn how to detach so they could kill people better. The Dalai Lama seems like a nice man and all, but Tibet is actually kind of fucked up; it's basically a feudal society reliant on a quasi-dynastic priesthood (dynastic in that the priests get to choose their successors).
And the philosophy of Buddhism also has problems, though I'm admittingly not as familiar with it as Abrahamic stuff. But detachment from the world is not, actually, a good philosophy.