Some tips on discussing the threat religion presents

[Az]

The first and most important thing to remember is that no matter what faith a person belongs to they are above all else an individual. Just because they belong to a sect you believe is a problem does not mean they share all the beliefs in it. Let a person be their own person.

Yes there are religious forces in our society that represent a serious threat to our rights and way of life. But there are many many religious people that do not represent a threat. They embrace the same rights you do and work to defend them.

Be careful when criticizing religion in general or a specific form of religion. There are so many forms and factions within our society that if you use too broad a stroke you are going to defame many that would support you. Be specific. If necissary include the political bent of the particular group you percieve as dangerous. It is the combination of the particular political mindset and religion that makes them dangerous.

Do not presume that religious people are idiots. Even those that seem fanatical. Religious belief has been around for as long as we have recorded history. The greatest minds in the world have tangled with religion and it is still here. Some of the greatest minds were even religious themself.

Religious conviction can be a sign that a person may have a particular political mindset. But it is definately not conclusive. If you are searching the political views of an individual you are going to need more than just their particular religion. You need further clues to indicate where they lay on the spectrum of the particular religion they claim. Richard Nixon claimed to be a Quaker. But he was unlike any Quaker I ever met.

We have a big tent here. We are not in the business of kicking people out of it. We are in the business of trying to find a way for all those in the tent to work together and to defend each other's rights. We have trouble enough facing down the right.

[Ron Green]

1. Just to be perverse....

"they are above all else an individual."

Actually we are individuals, AND we are a group (many groups, but the biggest one is humans, or maybe living things.) RWers want to over-emphasize the "individual" identity, so that government can be drowned in a bathtub. But don't forget that we are all part of a big culture with lots of spiritual traditions that have shaped even our secular world.

And if some believers are correct, we're all part of the same Being.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

12. The drop in the sea

Is individualized, if only for a moment. So it is that a person is an individual for their lifetime before they return to Unity. This is how one may view this concept of individuality/unity if one believes we're all part of the same Being.

[Ron Green]

14. I'm with you there. No, wait ... I AM you.

:D

[Beetwasher]

2. HooBoy

:popcorn:

[tx_dem41]

3. If you really want a big tent, maybe you should edit your subject title..

...to

"....the threat you think religion presents".

[The Doctor.]

8. While that is a fair suggestion...

There is a great deal of evidence that many people of a given religious mindset can be a threat not only to Democracy, but to the very survival of the human race itself.

There are many who, because of their religious beliefs, not only refuse to acknowledge that we are causing irreparable harm to our sustaining environment, but who want it to happen. They are possessed of the belief that, should the world be destroyed, They will be rewarded.

There are people actively seeking the destruction of the world because of their religious beliefs.

That is most certainly a threat posed by religion.

By no means am I saying that every religion is so caustic, but it is fair to say that a religious interpretation may be employed as a tool to control people or gain influence, but then that interpretation takes on a life of it's own.
There can be no argument against the threat of zealous fundamentalism in the face of the facts.

[TechBear_Seattle]

10. Agreed

I am an atheist, but I have also done ministry work for many years and have seen first hand the positive impact that religious belief can have on people's lives.

Religion and religious belief, in and of itself, is not the danger to American society and civilization. The forced imposition of one small group's religion upon everyone else, and the attempts to throw away more than two hundred years of secular society to base all laws on that one small group's religious beliefs... those are different matters entirely. But that is not a danger of religion; that is a danger of fascists and fanatics, and it would be just as dangerous if they were pushing any other ideology.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

13. You have that right

It's sort of like saying that "money is the root of all evil"-money is simply an object, simply there. That is why the correct quotation of this Bible verse is "the LOVE of money is the root of all evil". It's the human factor involved that causes the problem.

The concepts of the world's religions in and of themselves are benign. It is when humans interpret them, or mis-interpret them for their own ends that problems arise.

[AntiFascist]

26. Agreed

I mainly have a problem with the media's use of religion and the fostering of a personality cult surrounding our president for political purposes. People can get swept up in this, we know how easily it happened to the Germans at one time. Fortunately, it seems now that many people are catching on and won't be falling for Rove's tactics.

[The Doctor.]

4. At it's best, Religion is a psychological stronghold...

At it's worst, a crutch for avoiding responsibility and reality.

I absolutely agree that one cannot characterize an individual based on their beliefs. It is the actions of a given individual that should be used to determine whether or not they are ultimately anathema to a secular society.

Unfortunately, most of the vigorously 'faithful' I have dealt with, a couple of whom are good friends, are wantonly ignorant of any other type of thinking than their own. They refuse to acknowledge empirical facts despite the overwhelming and unquestionable veracity those facts possess.

They are very nice people, but the more zealous one is, I have found, the less inclined they are to reason.

But I must agree that one cannot presume everyone of a given faith is likewise ignorant.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

15. Again, this varies from individual to individual

My particular Sufi Order is universal in scope: we honor and study all the world's spritual traditions, and celebrate them in a service called the Universal Worship. Our tradition calls on us to be tolerant of all people, and not to try and make everyone become like us. But I have heard Sufi initiates saying that they would make everyone Sufis if they had the chance. I am glad for them that they found their path in our Way, but they don't quite "get" it. Just because a belief system fits your needs does not mean that it will fit the whole world's. I have dear friends who live Christianity and don't just spout selected verses, and the beauty of their lives and their living faith brings joy to my heart.

[The Doctor.]

16. Of course I refer more to zealotry than to faith...

And I know many real Christians who truly follow the teachings of Christ.

Although I have no doubt whatsoever that the world really would be a better place if people practiced actual Christianity... or any other variations on the teachings of peace and enlightenment, one cannot help but recoil at the bastardization of what would otherwise be a beautiful philosophy.

So I suppose the distinction I'm trying to make is between those who are truly tolerant, loving, and enlightened, and those who are not.

Although technically a Presbyterian, I came across a nifty online test whose results suggested I was a 'Universal Unitarian'... those who believe that all faith has merit.

Those who believe that their way is the only way to believe have the greatest potential to become a threat to society.

Just take Neo-conservatism for example.

[kikiek]

5. I just finished "The End of Faith". Very interesting and good. He doesn't

take liberal or conservative side. Just calls it like he sees it. That religion will be what does this world in. Good book even though I was angry at times while reading it.

[soleft]

6. Also, even tho people progress beyond a stage of development

All the other stages a person has passed thru are still a part of that person.

I say this in regard to fundamentalist beliefs.

I may view an individual who takes the bible literally, and as an example would believe that 6000 years ago Adam and Eve actually existed in the Garden of Eden, as a person who holds onto a primative belief system.

Whatever it is in that person that allows or compels them to hold those beliefs - at some point in my life I have experienced those same forces and tho I may not manifest it the same, there is some other way the experience has affected me.

The same fears, ignorance and pain which drives a person to believe in fundamentalists beliefs are the same fears, ignorance and pain everyone experiences - we just react in different ways in different stages of our lives.

[KittyWampus]

7. Some tips on discussing the threat Science Fundamentalism presents

understand that huge sums of money and energy are invested in keeping Science in its current self limiting box. Any attempts to break into new areas are anathema to those who are greatly invested in the status quo.

Really, trying to argue with Science Fundies is as fruitless as arguing with Religious Fundies.

Oh, and Science Fundies can't recognize their own slavish adherence to doctrine.

[Jokerman]

18. "Science Fundies"?

Not sure I've ever heard that term before. What exactly does that mean?

[BillZBubb]

20. Oh Please! You can't be serious.

Maybe if you try reasoning with "Science Fundies" WITH FACTS you'll have a better result. Science is about what all the available evidence and data imply.

The only box limiting science is evidence. If the evidence contradicts any scientific belief, that belief changes. The contradictory evidence must be solid, but when it is shown to be so, science changes it's view rapidly.

Their is no slavish adherence to doctrine, only an insistence on valid, verifiable, and reproducable evidence.

[Az]

21. Evidentiary process

If something has an effect on this universe it can be counted as evidence and the scientific method can deal with it in time. Anything that does not affect this universe is beyond science's grasp.

[BillZBubb]

22. And?

I don't think (m)any scientists would disagree that "anything that does not affect this universe is beyond science's grasp." At that point it is philosophy.

But if it affects this universe and can be observed directly or indirectly, it is in science's grasp. Then facts (represented by all evidence at hand) rule.

[Az]

23. It was a continuation of your idea

Not a disagreement.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

9. Nominated

I have always found your posts in regards to religion to be thoughtful, AZ. You also are not afraid to explain your viewpoint, but it is always done in a respectful manner. If folks who read this thread have not read your posts before, they might not be aware of the fact that you, indeed, walk your talk, and I want to make that very clear to all readers.

Thank you for a very thoughtful post.

[Rowdyboy]

11. If we base our opposition to Miers on anti-religious bigotry, we're no

better than the Republicans we despise.

Thank you for your thread. Wish it was required reading.

[txaslftist]

17. Excellent post...except for the title. "threat" from religion?

Ugh.

[youthere]

19. Perhaps "...threat from religious zealotry?"

??

[txaslftist]

24. Much mo betta.

[youthere]

31. LOL

yes...much gooder.

[AirmensMom]

25. I almost skipped this one -- glad I didn't.

I've read enough anti-religion threads today to last me for a while and I was afraid this might be another one. Since I am a Christian, I've been getting tired of reading that I must be nuts, weak, stupid ... name the insult. How many religious people feel unwelcome at DU because of all the religion-bashing that goes on?

I don't like this administration any more than anyone else here. I hate how they have misrepresented my religion and the harm they've done in the name of God. Anyone who believes that bush and his friends are Christians has been reading the wrong books.

Embracing or rejecting religion is an individual choice. No one has to accept my decision about it. But we're shooting ourselves in the foot if we give people of faith the impression that they've come to the wrong place when they join DU.

I was pleasantly surprised, and impressed, by your post, Az. At last, someone has the sense to suggest a little tolerance.

[Stand and Fight]

27. I second your thoughts, AirmensMom.

I have often felt the very same way myself on DU. However, I am comforted in the fact that these are people -- that is, those who are hell-bent anti-religion -- are simply more vocal in their beliefs.

I don't agree with everything in the Bible, and I strongly feel it is NOT meant to be taken wholly literally. It serves as a moral compass for me. I strongly believe in God and that Jesus died on the cross --rather literally or in a figurative sense. When people condemn Christianity wholesale on here it is doing more harm than good.

Tolerance is a good thing. A universal value that should be practiced by antiest and Christians alike. So should humility.

[DeepModem Mom]

28. Thanks for this post, AirmensMom. nt

[AirmensMom]

30. You're welcome!

:hi:

[DeepModem Mom]

29. Thanks for this post, Az. nt