Jump to content

Interfaith


musicman

Recommended Posts

Interesting that my assessment is unfair, but being subjected to someone else's belief system on my own front porch is not. By the way, I did not become agnostic from attending Catholic school. Catholic church and school bored me, but it did not turn me against religion. Since you bring it up, I will tell you that it was the particular brand of fire and brimstone, intolerant Christianity that is practiced by many in Texas that caused me to question religion. In North Carolina, even though they are very religious, they were a kinder, gentler religious (at least when I lived here). Once I moved to Texas, the in your face style was revolting to me. I questioned it, read up on it, and, unlike woody's theory, as an adult, rejected it.

I am very comfortable in my agnostic skin, with the exception that I, like millenica, tire of those who feel the urge to push THEIR religion in my face. Common courtesy, as dictated by the 90% majority, says you do not tell the religious to keep their "blessed day" comments to themselves. Therefore, I did not respond to the 2 emails and one voicemail I received JUST TODAY, wishing me a "blessed day". Like I said before, I really have better things to do.

I suppose you could call me prejudiced against religion, though prejudice generally refers to a class of people, not an institution. Not sure what it proves, but if that's the term you like, so be it. Having been raised Catholic, I liken my situation as more akin to a reformed smoker. But, if you REALLY want an example of prejudice, why not look at the percentage of Christians who would not vote for an atheist for president.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think some of the non-religious are just as bad as the super/over religious.

You'll get no disagreement from me about that statement. There are good and bad people among the non-religious as well as among the super/over religious. IMHO, knowing how religious/non-religious a particular individual reveals little about their moral or ethical stances or behavior.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting that my assessment is unfair, but being subjected to someone else's belief system on my own front porch is not.

Mellow out. Such truely assinine people should have absolutely no bearing upon what you think. You espouse such individual conviction that I am honestly surprised that you would allow this to affect you. The greatest conceivable act of individualism is not to care that they think as they do, and not to rebel against it solely because they annoy you. They are only as relevent as their argument...which is to say, not very (in most cases). Treat them as such; otherwise, that you react adversely is an open admittance that they are relevent to you in some form or another.

As for those that wish you a blessed day, let them do so if it brings them comfort. If it is meaningless to you, then treat it as silence. Meaning is only what you make of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even atheists and agnostics have faith in something, whether it be science, that which they can observe, measure, or otherwise perceive, or just in their own constructed realm.

Belief in something that can be demonstrated repeatedly and independently verified is not an act of faith. It's about constructing the proper theory to explain a phenomenon, and devise new experiments to either confirm, amend, or reject the theory based on new observation. And this is the distinguishing trait from acts of faith: a theory is improved to take into account new understanding. Unlike religious faith, there is a rejection of dogma. If someone makes an assertion using the theory of gravity as justification, it can be tested. It doesn't have to be accepted as an article of faith.

Anyway, yes, being part of the 5% of Americans who actively reject all superstition and existence of deities has been an interesting experience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Belief in something that can be demonstrated repeatedly and independently verified is not an act of faith; is the theory of gravitational-attraction something that has to be accepted as an act of faith? No, because gravity will exist regardless if you accept it or not. It's about constructing the proper theory to explain a phenomenon, and devise new experiments to either confirm, amend, or reject the theory based on new observation. And this is the distinguishing trait from acts of faith: a theory is improved to take into account new understanding. Unlike religious faith, there is a rejection of dogma.

I question conciousness, perception, and memory. I fundamentally dispute the assumption of sanity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Red I certainly understand if a fruitcake is at your front door, you'll reject him or her just as I would. Also, your not the only one that can't stand religious nuts pushing there belief and doctrine, in fact it's an automatic rejection for most of us. Quite frankly I'm not sure what I beleive half the time, but I do know that to broad brush religion as has been done here, is simply wrong and unfounded.

I don't want to end up in a war here, in fact my bet is that if we were discussing this over a beer, we would probably have a lot more in common with this subject than you might think. I just have a problem with the broad brushing of all religion (specifically Christianity), and making it out as only the stupid people believe.

Let's just agree to dissagree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This reminds me of the time in the Walmart parking lot out in Katy Mills. Some person from a church out there were handing out little packets (forgot what they were). She asked me if I believe in God. I said "no" just to see what she would say. She started preaching to me about how God is real (the whole nine yards). I just stopped her and said I do and walked away. That's the type of stuff that I don't think should happen. I think you should be able to buy eggs at 9 PM without someone passing out church flyers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Red I certainly understand if a fruitcake is at your front door, you'll reject him or her just as I would. Also, your not the only one that can't stand religious nuts pushing there belief and doctrine, in fact it's an automatic rejection for most of us. Quite frankly I'm not sure what I beleive half the time, but I do know that to broad brush religion as has been done here, is simply wrong and unfounded.

I don't want to end up in a war here, in fact my bet is that if we were discussing this over a beer, we would probably have a lot more in common with this subject than you might think. I just have a problem with the broad brushing of all religion (specifically Christianity), and making it out as only the stupid people believe.

Let's just agree to dissagree.

Gary, I'll respond to one point, then take you up on your offer.

To become an agnostic, or to take it even further, an atheist, REQUIRES a broad brush of religion. It is impossible for one to doubt or disallow the existence of a higher power without coming to the conclusion that organized religion is nothing more than a club or organization for those who have not yet come to the conclusion that there is no God. For one to claim agnosticism, yet believe in religion, is not to be agnostic at all.

Now, this is not a slap at believers, though many will take it that way. It is also not to suggest that many members of a church, including those of Interfaith, do not do good works, or that acts of charity performed in the name of God are any less admirable. It is merely my belief that the underlying premise of the church is faulty. I think you have mistaken my doubt of the existence of a higher being, and more specifically, of a Christian God, for an indictment of all believers. That is not my belief or my intent. In fact, I am fully aware of the possibility that I am completely wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This reminds me of the time in the Walmart parking lot out in Katy Mills. Some person from a church out there were handing out little packets (forgot what they were). She asked me if I believe in God. I said "no" just to see what she would say. She started preaching to me about how God is real (the whole nine yards). I just stopped her and said I do and walked away. That's the type of stuff that I don't think should happen. I think you should be able to buy eggs at 9 PM without someone passing out church flyers.

She should have the right to pass out flyers, but you should have the right to say "No, thank you" and go about your own personal business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, but she started going on about the church and how great it is, then gave me the flyer, then asked me. I do believe, but wanted to see her reaction.

Whether or not you believe is another issue. The issue is freedom of religion, and freedom from religion. It shouldn't matter to you what I believe, and I shouldn't care what you believe. When religion forces itself into the government, and how we live our day-to-day lives, that's when we need to care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whether or not you believe is another issue. The issue is freedom of religion, and freedom from religion. It shouldn't matter to you what I believe, and I shouldn't care what you believe. When religion forces itself into the government, and how we live our day-to-day lives, that's when we need to care.

TANGENT ALERT: Speaking of which, does it strike anyone else as odd that all the Democrat presidential candidates have started chiming in more frequently as supportive of Christian faith than most of the Republican candidates? Populism is a scary thing. :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whether or not you believe is another issue. The issue is freedom of religion, and freedom from religion. It shouldn't matter to you what I believe, and I shouldn't care what you believe. When religion forces itself into the government, and how we live our day-to-day lives, that's when we need to care.

If it's forced, then it's not faith.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it's forced, then it's not faith.

to the contrary. if it's forced, you can only accept it on faith. what little tools available to investigate and test dogma are wrestled from you. let's not muddy the meaning of the word with the touchy-feely evangelical notion of faith. faith is the belief in a doctrine without any proof.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, but she started going on about the church and how great it is, then gave me the flyer, then asked me. I do believe, but wanted to see her reaction.

That is actually consider good, there are worse things done than this.

It may be annoying but it certainly isn't bad when compare to getting religious rules into government.

I wouldn't mind getting preached a little more if it means getting their attention off trying to put religion into government.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

faith is the belief in a doctrine without any proof.

What say you about Hebrews 11:1?

"Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen."

And let it be known that the word hope is not a "touchy-feely" word either. It's not like, "I hope I get a million dollars." It's a hope in something that will happen. Not might happen.

And there may not be proof, but there's evidence. If there were proof, there would be no need for faith.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TANGENT ALERT: Speaking of which, does it strike anyone else as odd that all the Democrat presidential candidates have started chiming in more frequently as supportive of Christian faith than most of the Republican candidates? Populism is a scary thing. :unsure:

David Kuo has noticed and found it odd enough to have provided a commentary about the situation on NPR's All Things Considered

<http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10785980>

Commentary <h3 class="contenttitle">When it Comes to Faith, Partisan Lines are Blurring</h3> by David Kuo

All Things Considered, June 6, 2007

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As much as I don't want someone knocking on my door or approaching me on public property to talk to me about their religion, it would be worse if that right was taken away.
on public property is one thing, but the walmart example is private property. the owner can dictate what goes on there.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...