Anything goes secular spirituality thread
I really struggled about whether or not to respond here, so here we go:
If religion didn't wield political power, I wouldn't care as much about it. I have a grandson due in October, and I would like that boy to grow up in a country where the most intelligent and most honest among us have a chance of serving in Congress, or maybe even as President. Right now, any candidate had *better* claim belief in deity. There is no other way in.
We all watched the pope tell Americans how to vote in 2004, and we watched the results - the Catholic vote went Republican (anybody remember the "wafer watch" around Kerry?). I just cannot think that an institution - which abhors the use of condoms for AIDS prevention and considers use of any form of birth control by anyone to be a mortal sin - is anything but evil in world where 50,000 children starve to death every day and another 5,500 people die of AIDS.
Again, it's not the people (I wonder sometimes if many practicing Catholics have much of a clue about their religion), but the institution continues to be destructive.
If religion didn't wield political power, I wouldn't care as much about it. I have a grandson due in October, and I would like that boy to grow up in a country where the most intelligent and most honest among us have a chance of serving in Congress, or maybe even as President. Right now, any candidate had *better* claim belief in deity. There is no other way in.
We all watched the pope tell Americans how to vote in 2004, and we watched the results - the Catholic vote went Republican (anybody remember the "wafer watch" around Kerry?). I just cannot think that an institution - which abhors the use of condoms for AIDS prevention and considers use of any form of birth control by anyone to be a mortal sin - is anything but evil in world where 50,000 children starve to death every day and another 5,500 people die of AIDS.
Again, it's not the people (I wonder sometimes if many practicing Catholics have much of a clue about their religion), but the institution continues to be destructive.
Misty, you said a lot of what I deleted! But you were a lot nicer than I was, which is why I deleted my post. Right now it seems that in the U.S. it's the religious conservatives in political power rather than those of conservative political beliefs. Religion isn't even supposed to be part of the government. And I'm not attacking any political party here! To paraphrase Bill Maher, if you even suggest a democrat might be liberal he puts on an orange vest and heads into the woods to kill something. Politicians are by nature a wishy-washy group, but even the "liberals" in office seem to be fairly conservative.
Unless of course I'm just way crazy liberal and by comparison everyone else is conservative. Haha.
I took a government class a couple years ago, one of those b.s. courses everyone has to take where they treat students like cattle and have a grad student tell you about the Constitution. There were about 250 students in my class. My instructor asked how many of us would vote for a presidential candidate who, when asked his religion, said something like, "I won't answer because there is no religious test for the presidency." Three of us raised our hands. Wow. I'm not religious myself and I'm not so concerned about the guy's religion. But from his answer I could be fairly sure he'd read the Constitution, and that would be good.
The problem is that there is a religious test for the presidency. It's cultural. A non-religious candidate has zero chance. It's sad because our government was never meant to be so tied up in religion.
Unless of course I'm just way crazy liberal and by comparison everyone else is conservative. Haha.
I took a government class a couple years ago, one of those b.s. courses everyone has to take where they treat students like cattle and have a grad student tell you about the Constitution. There were about 250 students in my class. My instructor asked how many of us would vote for a presidential candidate who, when asked his religion, said something like, "I won't answer because there is no religious test for the presidency." Three of us raised our hands. Wow. I'm not religious myself and I'm not so concerned about the guy's religion. But from his answer I could be fairly sure he'd read the Constitution, and that would be good.
The problem is that there is a religious test for the presidency. It's cultural. A non-religious candidate has zero chance. It's sad because our government was never meant to be so tied up in religion.
Gneiss, WOW about your class. I'm stupified by how many college students behave like cattle and dumbly follow wherever authority leads them. Many (not all) of the Bush-era kids seem even more drone-ish. It seems to me that it should be a time of questioning and exploring.
The government became even more snarled up in religion in recent years, but I hope that's changing now that the consequences have proved so dreadful. I agree that I'd much rather have a Pres. that has read the Constitution than one who caters to common irrationality.
I think it is changing though, and the diversity that exists here on SR kind of bears that out. Still, I wondered if my post would be allowed to remain. It's a slow process,
but it seems the acceptance of critiques of religions and their effects on the world is becoming more common. There is NO text that is universally sacred, but freedom of conscience is.
The government became even more snarled up in religion in recent years, but I hope that's changing now that the consequences have proved so dreadful. I agree that I'd much rather have a Pres. that has read the Constitution than one who caters to common irrationality.
I think it is changing though, and the diversity that exists here on SR kind of bears that out. Still, I wondered if my post would be allowed to remain. It's a slow process,
but it seems the acceptance of critiques of religions and their effects on the world is becoming more common. There is NO text that is universally sacred, but freedom of conscience is.
This is interesting. I am in the middle of rereading Huxley's "Brave New World, Revisited." I highly recommend it. I'm finding it even more relevant now than I did 40 years ago in high school. Huxley and George Orwell were so ahead of their times!
Recently I read "Down and Out in Paris and London" by Orwell and don't know how I managed to miss it.
Oh, yeah, I'm a commie. Got a red shirt to prove it too! LOL
Love,
Lenina
Recently I read "Down and Out in Paris and London" by Orwell and don't know how I managed to miss it.
Oh, yeah, I'm a commie. Got a red shirt to prove it too! LOL
Love,
Lenina
Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 26,425
This is interesting. I am in the middle of rereading Huxley's "Brave New World, Revisited." I highly recommend it. I'm finding it even more relevant now than I did 40 years ago in high school. Huxley and George Orwell were so ahead of their times!
Recently I read "Down and Out in Paris and London" by Orwell and don't know how I managed to miss it.
Oh, yeah, I'm a commie. Got a red shirt to prove it too! LOL
Love,
Lenina
Recently I read "Down and Out in Paris and London" by Orwell and don't know how I managed to miss it.
Oh, yeah, I'm a commie. Got a red shirt to prove it too! LOL
Love,
Lenina
me too by the way (grin)
Muslim countries have elections which seem to be more a façade than anything, so the rule of religion comes from the top down.
In America, our democracy indeed holds the power to change our leaders, so the rule of religion comes from the bottom up.
The only hope for a world which is primarily comprised of unbelievers is to question the irrational components of religion and convince enough people to reject dogmatic religion.
Politicians are all things to all people. Show me a successful politician and I’ll show you an artist in disingenuous acts and words.
In America, our democracy indeed holds the power to change our leaders, so the rule of religion comes from the bottom up.
The only hope for a world which is primarily comprised of unbelievers is to question the irrational components of religion and convince enough people to reject dogmatic religion.
Politicians are all things to all people. Show me a successful politician and I’ll show you an artist in disingenuous acts and words.
When I first told my Mom we were going to homeschool, she asked me, very honestly concerned, if we were communists. She probably would have had a heart attack right there on the spot if I had answered "Yes"
Once in college I told her my political leanings were towards communism, she said "Just promise me you won't move to Russia." I love my Mom, but sometimes the things she says make me choke from trying not to laugh at her!
Once in college I told her my political leanings were towards communism, she said "Just promise me you won't move to Russia." I love my Mom, but sometimes the things she says make me choke from trying not to laugh at her!
Originally Posted by Freepath
In America, our democracy indeed holds the power to change our leaders, so the rule of religion comes from the bottom up.
When western Christian leaders admit to praying to God before going to war tells me that this influence comes from the top down and is little different from a moderate Muslim country.
Paul
Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: France
Posts: 783
But isn't it society that creates the individual? Religion, or Christianity in particular influences American culture, in my view it cannot be as simple as coming from the bottom up as the two interact. The top influences the bottom, the bottom influences the top. One only has to look at a dollar bill to see how the idea of God influences American society.
When western Christian leaders admit to praying to God before going to war tells me that this influence comes from the top down and is little different from a moderate Muslim country.
Paul
When western Christian leaders admit to praying to God before going to war tells me that this influence comes from the top down and is little different from a moderate Muslim country.
Paul
Currently Active Users Viewing this Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)