Originally Posted By jonvn You don't need god to do that. But if it helps you get you through your day. Just don't try and make me conform to your religious views.
Originally Posted By ecdc "And I went through a period of considerable doubt in my newly found faith until I realized that even if I am wrong and facing oblivion, living according to the teachings I believe are God-given means that I am contributing something positive to the world rather than taking something away from it." That would put you in stage 5 of Fowler's theory But seriously, I think this is a very healthy approach to religion. But it seems like your own religious perspective is evidence that jon's point is correct: you recognize that even if you're wrong, your'e doing some good. So chances are, if your faith expected you to do something you considered harmful, you wouldn't do it. In short, you are your own final authority and you use religious teachings to guide your life as you see best. Sometimes these teachings may conflict with personal beliefs, and you're forced to make a choice or a compromise; sometimes you make accept religious teachings as being more inspired, sometimes not. But for those who have not been on both sides of the fence, they tend to place their authority outside of themselves - in the Bible, in religious leaders like the Pope, etc. Therefore, when these external authority figures require certain things from the faithful, they comply - whether it's simply believing homosexuality is a sin and should be opposed, or whether it's believing God wants you to fly a 747 into a skyscraper.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer >>You don't need god to do that.<< Of course not. But my work is amplified by working with others who are moving toward the same goal. >>But if it helps you get you through your day.<< You make it sound like I would be unhappy if I weren't doing this kind of work. That's simply not the case. But I do find a sense of communion and camaraderie and drive that comes from being part of a community that is working toward something. >>Just don't try and make me conform to your religious views.<< Nor me to yours.
Originally Posted By DlandJB There's not. There's just what we have here, and what we make for ourselves. In a few decades following our deaths, we are forgotten and all we knew becomes lost. The thing to do is to make your life a happy one, be kind to your children and to others, and hope that they will pass that on. >>>> If that is as far as you go, you certainly will be forgotten -- and probably in less then a generation. But whatever makes you happy -- even if being miserable and seeing the world as a miserable and selfish place makes you happy -- which it essentially appears to, based on posts like these.
Originally Posted By jonvn "You make it sound like I would be unhappy if I weren't doing this kind of work." I don't know what you do, nor do I care. Nor do I care if it makes you happy, as that is not my concern. "Nor me to yours." I'm not about to. But I would suggest you stay out of political discussions if it is your religious "beliefs" that makes you want to impose your views on me.
Originally Posted By jonvn "If that is as far as you go, you certainly will be forgotten" Don't kid yourself. In 150 years, no one will know you exist any more than me. "even if being miserable and seeing the world as a miserable and selfish place makes you happy" I'm neither miserable nor unhappy. You think you've got some sort of lock on happiness because of some mystical nonsense you may follow? You couldn't be more wrong. You think you're going to get some grand reward for what you do here? Forget it. It's not going to happen. Live a happy life, have happy kids, and that's about it. Unless you do something along the lines of Queen Elizabeth I, no one will remember you or anything you have done.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer >>But it seems like your own religious perspective is evidence that jon's point is correct: you recognize that even if you're wrong, your'e doing some good. So chances are, if your faith expected you to do something you considered harmful, you wouldn't do it. In short, you are your own final authority and you use religious teachings to guide your life as you see best. Sometimes these teachings may conflict with personal beliefs, and you're forced to make a choice or a compromise; sometimes you make accept religious teachings as being more inspired, sometimes not.<< I would agree that I am my own final authority because we are not forced to believe one way or the other by God. It's our decision to sink or swim. I'm an Anglican - this kind of struggle is at the heart of our tradition. That doesn't mean that the decisions I make are always the correct ones, but as intelligent beings they are our decisions to make. >>But for those who have not been on both sides of the fence, they tend to place their authority outside of themselves - in the Bible, in religious leaders like the Pope, etc. Therefore, when these external authority figures require certain things from the faithful, they comply - whether it's simply believing homosexuality is a sin and should be opposed, or whether it's believing God wants you to fly a 747 into a skyscraper.<< I disagree. I know a lot of people who have always been religious who would no more kill others than you or I would. It depends on the tradition and what those people are taught. Most Christians aren't fundamentalists, and most Christians don't march in lockstep with their leadership.
Originally Posted By jonvn "I know a lot of people who have always been religious who would no more kill others than you or I would." Religion is the excuse that people use to do whatever it is they wanted to do anyway.
Originally Posted By alexbook May I suggest the following correction? Religion is *an* excuse that people use to do whatever it is they wanted to do anyway.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer >>But I would suggest you stay out of political discussions if it is your religious "beliefs" that makes you want to impose your views on me.<< We're having a conversation. I'm not imposing anything on you. And, as a citizen, I have as much right to express my opinions as you do. I haven't advocated making any religious belief a governmental law here, ever. I think your prejudice is making you read things into what I'm saying that I haven't actually said.
Originally Posted By jonvn "Religion is *an* excuse" Yes, AN excuse. We see that everyday in the news. "as a citizen, I have as much right to express my opinions as you do." Of course you do. However, if you want to dictate public law based on your religious viewpoint, I think that's not right. And the reason I say this is because of your stance on abortion, which I believe you are opposed to. Christian, religious, anti-choice.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer >However, if you want to dictate public law based on your religious viewpoint, I think that's not right.<< Why? Why would a non-religious viewpoint be any more valid in the lawmaking process? It all boils down to constitutionality as far as I'm concerned. >>And the reason I say this is because of your stance on abortion, which I believe you are opposed to<< I am opposed to it, but I've never said it should be illegal, have I? I don't think it should be. Again, your prejudice is causing you to make assumptions that simply aren't true.
Originally Posted By ecdc "I disagree. I know a lot of people who have always been religious who would no more kill others than you or I would. It depends on the tradition and what those people are taught. Most Christians aren't fundamentalists, and most Christians don't march in lockstep with their leadership." You're right that it depends on the tradition and what they're taught. For an American Christian church to suddenly tell their members they have to kill Muslims - well, no one is going to do it. But it isn't because these people necessarily have a healthy relationship with their church. It's just extremely uncharacteristic of their authority figure - be it the Bible or their leader. But they will follow, unquestioningly, their authority on gay marriage, prayer in schools, etc. And there are plenty of churches that people are born into and are lifelong members of that also encourage free thinking - you'd be hard pressed to find a Unitarian who's going to follow lockstep with anything their leaders say. So I'm guilty of painting with the proverbial broad brush. Perhaps my statements should be changed to refer to more fundamentalist faiths - Evangelical Christians, Mormons, some Catholics, Southern Baptists, etc. And of course each of these groups will have their exceptions. But by and large, these are groups that if their authority tells them something or teaches them something, there will be no questions asked.
Originally Posted By jonvn "Why would a non-religious viewpoint be any more valid in the lawmaking process?" Because the burden of your religious beliefs are not my concern. If you wish to engage in certain beliefs and practices, that's fine. I should not have to conform to what you believe I should do based on your faith. "I've never said it should be illegal, have I? I don't think it should be." I was under the impression that you did. If I am wrong, I apologize for my error.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer >>Because the burden of your religious beliefs are not my concern. If you wish to engage in certain beliefs and practices, that's fine. I should not have to conform to what you believe I should do based on your faith.<< But it wouldn't be because of *my* faith - it would be because a law was passed that is Constitutional. Laws don't get passed in this country without some broad-based measure of support, and they don't stand if they are in violation of the Constitution. I might be inspired by my faith to work toward laws supporting programs to help the indigent or elderly, for example, but that doesn't mean that the law itself would have a religious component. Christian organizations were behind the minimum wage increases that passed on the ballots this year, but those laws were not written to force everyone to be Christian or to give Christians some advantage. Christians also worked to end slavery and to fight for civil rights a century later, but even though they were inspired by religious beliefs the laws that were passed were completely secular and Constitutional.
Originally Posted By DlandJB Don't kid yourself. In 150 years, no one will know you exist any more than me.>>> If they remember me or not isn't the point for me. I don't worry about it. But your blanket statement, that only the Queen Elizabeth's will be remembered, is just too narrow. But then again, I was a history major, so maybe I just keep track of a few more than you. <<I'm neither miserable nor unhappy.>> Ah, so then you are just a carrier? <<You think you've got some sort of lock on happiness because of some mystical nonsense you may follow? You couldn't be more wrong.>> I've no lock on happiness, but I have a tried and true path to follow...and I do have a lock on salvation. <<You think you're going to get some grand reward for what you do here? Forget it. It's not going to happen.>> Too late. I've already been rewarded.
Originally Posted By jonvn "Ah, so then you are just a carrier?" Heh. Yes. That's what people say to me, actually. I'm calm a lot, and they get hysterical. Some tend to panic. Especially when I'm driving. "I've no lock on happiness, but I have a tried and true path to follow...and I do have a lock on salvation." I'm glad for you. Me too. I have a path to follow for happiness and I'm as much saved as you are. "Too late. I've already been rewarded." Excellent. So you don't ever have to do a decent thing for another person again the rest of your life.
Originally Posted By ecdc "I've no lock on happiness, but I have a tried and true path to follow...and I do have a lock on salvation." And thus we see the problem with religion that we've been discussing all along. If one person's faith tells them they have a lock on salvation (or if Jesus, does...whatever) then what of those poor souls not of their faith? What happens to them? I don't accept Jesus as my personal savior. I think it's utterly absurd that a god has to come to earth to die for what I do wrong. I don't expect or want anyone to have to die for me. It's morbid and disgusting. What kind of God is this, anyway? He's all perfect and all powerful but the only way to save humankind is to kill your child? You'd think he'd work something else out. But, I digress. So it seems poor little me is doomed to hell. Gee, can't imagine why religion causes conflict and pain and suffering in the world. And as jon has already pointed out, we have about as much "proof" on our side as I have that Disneyland is cleary superior to Disneyworld. And by the way, anyone who goes to Disneyworld is a heretic and will burn in hellfire forever. Makes sense, don't it?
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>So you don't ever have to do a decent thing for another person again the rest of your life. << Now you're just twisting statements. You do love to argue.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>then what of those poor souls not of their faith? What happens to them?<< Some religions believe in grace. And I am not big on the idea that everyone is nice just so they get some kind of prize at the end. I think that misses the larger point. I know people who have shown me, by example and how they live their lives and treat others, the power of faith. And I've likewise known people who also treat others with respect and kindness, yet say they have no religious faith, that also have shown me that humans are more than the sum of their parts.
