Spiritual but not religious
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-nicolaou-religion-undeclared-20121228,0,4606917.storyOne of America's growing number of 'Nones' is making it her mission to find out what she might be missing.
By Corinna Nicolaou
December 28, 2012
I'm a "None." That's what pollsters call Americans who respond on national surveys to the question "What is your religious affiliation?" with a single word: "None."
According to the Pew Research Center, the ranks of the Nones have ballooned in recent years, making the fastest-growing religious affiliation no affiliation.
Between 1972 and 1989, about 7% of Americans identified as having no formal religious affiliation. However, between 1990 and 2012, that figure jumped to 19.6%. Among people under age 30, just over 30% say they have no religious affiliation. At the same time, the percentage of the U.S. population that identifies as Christian has experienced a steady decline, and other faiths have experienced modest growth at best.
The number of religious services I attended growing up could fit on one hand, with enough fingers left over for a peace sign. I hardly know a Catholic from a Protestant, let alone the belief systems of other world religions.
more at link
= new reply since forum marked as read
That would just be stupid.
religion where the congregants were told that they did not have direct access and had to speak to god through an intermediary, and am really curious as to what ones those are.
Okey, dokey.
See you around the campfire, NoOneMan. It's been a pleasure talking with you.
Studies show viewing nature, sex and viewing births all induce "spritual" experiences in the brain, though, nothing so profound as hallucinogenics (remember that 7 out of 10 people thing?). And all do not require a priest or a ritual. 
I personally have a serious dislike of hallucinogenic substances
You've tried psilocybin?
Remember, setting is everything and anxiety doesn't preclude a useful experience.
The problem, as i see it, is claiming that some ways are superior and should be adopted in lieu of what an individual finds the best way to go
"Superiority" is relative. But what I did find unsatisfactory about this article was the implication that people who do not practice religion are "missing out" on something, when I think we both agree such practices are not necessary for the full human experience. There are other ways (some quicker, some easier, and some potentially more enjoyable), and most people have already experienced them.
Also, what one perceives as the "best way to go" is not always objectively the most effective method to have a meaningful experience, but could also be simply dictated (erroneously) by culture. The person writing this article appears to be very much within the bounds of their culture, accepting unproven premises and looking into "worship directories". It bears some pointing out to other "Nones" that this is completely unnecessary (but to each their own).
Justices of the Peace and Psychologists.
I do weddings.
You know, if it goes so far that atheists need their own "rabbis", I gotta wonder how many steps past that will be required before they just form an alternative religion.
and also spontaneous non-intended events. And shamans are certainly not free from puffing up their preferred method and putting down other methods. 
I have experience from several methods, including various psychotropic essences, and spontaneous events. It's all the same and the richness of variety is precious. With respect to the power of "spirits" of certain psychotropic substances, my best advice would perhaps be not too much too soon, better to wait and let them come to you when time is right, instead of actively seeking, if communication with them is part of your path. But each path goes as goes and my advice is seldom needed.
a profound spiritual experience. People have known this forever.
That does not negate the fact that some people have an equally profound experience from another activity, including a spiritual or religious one.
No one here, a most certainly not the author of the piece, that religion has an exclusive hold in this area.
Why would you feel the need to exclude it, though, from spiritual or enlightening experiences that some people have. Perhaps it is what some people need. What difference does it make to you?
An ambitious, personal field study of sorts, I guess. (Fifty sounds like a year's worth of visits.) Could be an interesting travelogue.
It was truly enlightening and, with only a few exemptions, very positive experiences.
I also look forward to following her on this journey.
What will be interesting to watch is whether they start "congregating" in some way or stay completely away from organized groups.
My hunch is that they will begin to congregate, possibly in more secular groups. I also think the the unitarian/universalists have a real opportunity to grow, if they can identify and speak to this group.
