Perhaps I should have posted “The Devil and Rick Santorum” article here.
It is hugely frightening that so many un-witting people are being recruited to vote for individuals who don’t even have their best interests in mind, but simply appeal to their fears of uncertainty and anything that represents “the other.” A theocracy of any kind—and the religious right certainly seems to be aiming for a supposedly christian one—is the most repressive form of government possible.
But being afraid—of something real—means it’s all the more important to remain thoughtful and informed about what is real and factual, and to work to keep the facts available.
Fortunately along with atheists, agnostics and deists, there are enough Jews, Moslems, Mormons, Buddhists, etc., and Christians of splinter denominations who fear that they would be forced back into the dominant religion to prevent the dumb Christian evangelicals who think they are in the majority from changing the First Amendment.
Occam
That is how we got freedom of religion in the Bill of Rights to sart with. Too bad the (Southern) Baptists don’t admidt to their own history.
(edited to correct quotation ending.)
That’s right, Gary, early Southern Baptists saw the value (for themselves) of having separation of church and state. Should Muslims ever become the majority population (Bhudda forbid), all of the fundamentalist Christians will be scrambling to insure separation of church and state again.
Fortunately along with atheists, agnostics and deists, there are enough Jews, Moslems, Mormons, Buddhists, etc., and Christians of splinter denominations who fear that they would be forced back into the dominant religion to prevent the dumb Christian evangelicals who think they are in the majority from changing the First Amendment.
Occam
That is how we got freedom of religion in the Bill of Rights to sart with. Too bad the (Southern) Baptists don’t admidt to their own history.
(edited to correct quotation ending.)
That’s right, Gary, early Southern Baptists saw the value (for themselves) of having separation of church and state. Should Muslims ever become the majority population (Bhudda forbid), all of the fundamentalist Christians will be scrambling to insure separation of church and state again.
Perhaps I should have posted “The Devil and Rick Santorum” article here.
It is hugely frightening that so many un-witting people are being recruited to vote for individuals who don’t even have their best interests in mind, but simply appeal to their fears of uncertainty and anything that represents “the other.” A theocracy of any kind—and the religious right certainly seems to be aiming for a supposedly christian one—is the most repressive form of government possible.
But being afraid—of something real—means it’s all the more important to remain thoughtful and informed about what is real and factual, and to work to keep the facts available.
Fortunately along with atheists, agnostics and deists, there are enough Jews, Moslems, Mormons, Buddhists, etc., and Christians of splinter denominations who fear that they would be forced back into the dominant religion to prevent the dumb Christian evangelicals who think they are in the majority from changing the First Amendment.
Occam
That is how we got freedom of religion in the Bill of Rights to sart with. Too bad the (Southern) Baptists don’t admidt to their own history.
(edited to correct quotation ending.)
That’s right, Gary, early Southern Baptists saw the value (for themselves) of having separation of church and state. Should Muslims ever become the majority population (Bhudda forbid), all of the fundamentalist Christians will be scrambling to insure separation of church and state again.
What would Confucius say?
Kong-Fuzi say: Love everyone. Learn from the past. And let the most virtuous rule. (Note: I like that cute little emoticon.)
I think that though the founding fathers attempted to make a government that did not deny religion but existed outside of its influence that line has been distinctly blurred. I have talked to a few Atheists from the UK and one from Australia and they said that the US is usually seen as a Christian Nation. I believe that is due to the fact that somehow religion, especially Christianity has been allowed to have a presence in our laws and is especially prominent in certain politicians platforms. I also think that that is not because they are right to assume that is the direction our country should take but because they have the loudest voices up. Up until recently Atheists were a small and ignored minority especially in politics. I think this view of a Christian nation can be changed by atheist being more open and standing up for keeping religion out of government, politics, and state institutions
I think that though the founding fathers attempted to make a government that did not deny religion but existed outside of its influence that line has been distinctly blurred. I have talked to a few Atheists from the UK and one from Australia and they said that the US is usually seen as a Christian Nation. I believe that is due to the fact that somehow religion, especially Christianity has been allowed to have a presence in our laws and is especially prominent in certain politicians platforms. I also think that that is not because they are right to assume that is the direction our country should take but because they have the loudest voices up. Up until recently Atheists were a small and ignored minority especially in politics. I think this view of a Christian nation can be changed by atheist being more open and standing up for keeping religion out of government, politics, and state institutions
Maybe,maybe not; it could be that there are just more people predisposed to deep religious belief here in the U.S., than in the U.K. or Austrailia.
We are a relatively new country and have not had time to hash out certain issues. I think that maybe the religious people are quieter or calmer about it in some overseas countries
While the extremists are loud and they take credit for most of the U.S. population being church members, fewer and fewer people are bothering to go to church, and the number of atheists and agnostics has grown quite a bit in the last decade. I’m surprised that a fair number of TV programs have one or more of the main characters portrayed as non-believers. I think as more and more young people first ignore then reject religion we’ll see a shift away from it over the next twenty years.
We are a relatively new country and have not had time to hash out certain issues. I think that maybe the religious people are quieter or calmer about it in some overseas countries
I find it very interesting that the Abrahamic religions are the most extrovert and exclusive and actually allow violence. The eastern deistic religions seem to be much more introspective and solitary, stressing inner peace and tranquility.
We are a relatively new country and have not had time to hash out certain issues. I think that maybe the religious people are quieter or calmer about it in some overseas countries
If they are quieter and calmer about religion,then they are probably less religious by nature though.
We are a relatively new country and have not had time to hash out certain issues. I think that maybe the religious people are quieter or calmer about it in some overseas countries
I find it very interesting that the Abrahamic religions are the most extrovert and exclusive and actually allow violence. The eastern deistic religions seem to be much more introspective and solitary, stressing inner peace and tranquility.
Buhdism (sp?) seems nice, what little I know about it. No god, no sin (only longer paths to enlightenment) and chanting about the sacred teachings of karma, hardly seems like a religion at all.
I find it very interesting that the Abrahamic religions are the most extrovert and exclusive and actually allow violence. The eastern deistic religions seem to be much more introspective and solitary, stressing inner peace and tranquility.
Buhdism (sp?) seems nice, what little I know about it. No god, no sin (only longer paths to enlightenment) and chanting about the sacred teachings of karma, hardly seems like a religion at all.
Buddhism is borderline religious in its origins: the earliest teachings we have from the Buddha (the Pali Canon) are mostly about psychological and moral wellbeing; he viewed the two as interrelated. In that it’s not so different from Aristotle, though Buddhist practice did include meditation and chanting. (As with all pre-literate traditions like the Iliad and the Odyssey, chanting was necessary to memorize and retain the relevant information).
But Buddhism quickly took on all the ordinary trappings of religion. There are Buddhist deities both good and evil, there is even a notion that is similar to God (Buddha Nature that pervades the universe). There is no notion of original or infinitely punishable sin like in Christianity, but there is a notion of evil actions that get you bad karma which must be discharged in this life or the next lives. (Reincarnation). In practice, in places like Tibet there are also notions of magical spells and incantations, etc., invoking deities and devils for human purposes.
It’s possible to practice Buddhism without believing all that rot, because I would argue the core teaching of the Buddha is essentially psychological in character. There is nothing essentially supernatural about it. But to do so would be to reject virtually the entirety of contemporary Buddhist practice.
Another eastern practice that is borderline religious, but arguably more of a philosophy, is Confucianism.
