Americans Are Losing Their Religion -- But the Fundamentalists Have a Plan

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by StalkerSolent

 

Wait, wait, wait...you want to prevent people from using logic, reason and persuasion to spread their own beliefs?

Sorry for the multiple replies to your same post, but...
what do logic and reason have to do with fundamentalists? Their beliefs are both illogical and without "reason" being employed at all.
Please remember that the article is talking about the FEW Protestant extremists that are going abroad and spreading their hell-fire and eternal torture fantasy to "persuade" people and take advantage of them!

No problem
Fundamentalists employ logic and reason just the same as everyone else. I'm currently enrolled in a philosophy course in college, and the one thing I can tell you is...everyone disagrees with everyone. (Well, almost.) Yet all these philosophers use logic, reason, and persuasion to get their points across. The main difference, IMHO, is the difference in priorities: the idea of "what is the good life?" Similarly, in religion, everyone uses some form of logic or reason, however flawed, to get their point across. I think most logic in religion is actually pretty good; the major disagreement is with the presuppositions. For instance, "Hell is bad, therefore I don't want to go there," is quite sound, but the problem lies with the presupposition that Hell exists (which is notoriously controversial.)

In short, just because someone sounds illogical or unreasonable to us doesn't necessarily mean they are. Rather than arbitrarily deciding who is crazy and who is not, it is better to have an open debate in the field of reason, and let the truth win out.

reply to post by wildtimes


And the African converts to Christianity are somehow not adults? I seem to recall that the European's habit of treating them like children is now one of their most decried decisions.

reply to post by StalkerSolent

Those people have children!
Here's another picture of fundamentalist craziness: watch how their kids are reacting to her

reply to post by StalkerSolent

Rather than arbitrarily deciding who is crazy and who is not, it is better to have an open debate in the field of reason, and let the truth win out.

Arbitrarily? Nono....
first of all, though I don't want to use it as an "appeal to authority" or whatever, I have an advanced degree in clinical psychopathology. I know crazy when I see it.

The truth can't "win out" until the crazies are "weeded out" and corrected.

reply to post by wildtimes


Ah yes...the children.
Sooner or later, the children reach a point at which they must decide for themselves. Assuming no one pours acid down their throats, which I am against.
Understand me here, I'm not for the propagation of craziness. But I am absolutely against restrictions on free speech that curtail the right of a human being to obey his conscience. And I am definitely against having the state, or a government of some kind, deciding who is crazy and who isn't. That is the hallmark of a totalitarian regime.

reply to post by wildtimes

"First they laugh at you. Then they ignore you. Then they fight you. Then you win." - Ghandi

Although sometimes I have to wonder - it is numbers that make change happen, so does the truth always win...or just options of convenience? Between a world of convenience and a world of truth, which would our people choose?

I fear the answer.

reply to post by abeverage

That was hit piece (and rightly so) against the MM but it tends to throw a blanket much you did on all "Christians" much like hit pieces do to Muslims about terrorism. So please see it as such. The Extreme right will falter by this move as we can all hope, but true messages of peace and love will remain I hope.

I agree with you. Peace and love are the answer.
And as far as I know, only nut-job "Islamist" Muslims are terrorizing people - look what they did to Mali!

The majority of Muslims do not preach. They don't proselytize or "recruit" people.
We're talking about terrorism using God as the weapon.

reply to post by AfterInfinity


*gasping for air* Bout time you showed up!

It's a dire situation, to be sure.

reply to post by BlueMule



Yeah, they have. I'm not angry so much as passionate about this stuff.

(I knew I'd win you over eventually! )

reply to post by wildtimes


Do you know what a protestant is? They are against exactly what the Roman Catholic Church has been and is becoming once again.. A persecuting bunch of thugs.

reply to post by DarknStormy


Yes, I do. I was raised in the Episcopal faith.
Left it, also.

And we're not talking about the RCC here, we're talking about fringe Protestants. Please read the article to understand the points of the OP.

But, as an aside, I so far applaud Pope Francis for his actions. On NPR this afternoon I heard a bit about how he met with world religious leaders (including mainstream Protestants and non-Christian leaders as well), about how important it is to revere ALL of creation. He even mentioned non-believers as strong and needed allies to spread his "new" message of love and care of all life.

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by StalkerSolent

 

Rather than arbitrarily deciding who is crazy and who is not, it is better to have an open debate in the field of reason, and let the truth win out.

Arbitrarily? Nono....
first of all, though I don't want to use it as an "appeal to authority" or whatever, I have an advanced degree in clinical psychopathology. I know crazy when I see it.

The truth can't "win out" until the crazies are "weeded out" and corrected.

I apologize in advance for my long response. I kinda hit some rabbit trails, but the short version is that I don't trust people to decide who is crazy and enforce it via reeducation and "weeding out."

I understand your reticence to appeal to authority, it's a good instinct (IMHO.) And I've got no reason to doubt your credentials, nor do I think you would ever suggest anything remotely resembling any of the atrocities we've discussed here. You'll have to forgive me for thinking that (and please don't take this personally), some people know "demonic possession" when they see it. Hopefully that thought will help explain my occasional antipathy towards authority figures, whether secular, political, or religious.

But here's my question: what does sane look like? Who's not crazy? No one is entirely sane, rational, or reasonable. If everyone's equal, who gets to decide who's crazy? The experts? And can the crazies ever be weeded out in the first place? Or are people deep down broken creatures? Could it be that the crazies are us, and we're just waiting to escape?

If you ask me, I'd say the study of humanity throughout the past century has proven that humans are deeply flawed creatures. I don't think the people who were weeding out the mentally unfit at the Nazi death camps were insane–but could you really call them mentally healthy people? And are they really different from us? And if they aren't different from us in some way, do we really want a few of us deciding, on behalf of society, who is crazy and who isn't? Shouldn't we trust people to make their own choices?

You're probably more adept at asking and answering those types of questions than I am But if you take into account the idea that none of us are perfect, maybe my reluctance to allow the "crazies" to be "corrected" and "weeded out" makes more sense. Once we start, where do we stop?

reply to post by StalkerSolent


Very valid points. And good questions.
To give a short answer instead of launching into a diatribe about "crazy", I'll just say that when people impose their beliefs (not 'share', but IMPOSE) on others, and those beliefs HURT PEOPLE, emotionally or physically, they should be stopped from doing so.

Are you familiar with the Westboro Baptist Church?
I really, really want to encourage you to watch "Jesus Camp", and look further into these things. What we need is sensible people who are vocally opposing the spread of bigoted, archaic, hell-fire teaching. Remember that these countries they are infiltrating are not well-educated, affluent people. They aren't dealing with "First World Problems" like westernized people are...they are struggling to survive.

Written like a true homosexual with a hidden agenda. You spread your own religion in your own way. A bit two faced don't you think, considering you want children in preschools to learn about homosexuality and want to see all people to come to what you believe is true and right?

reply to post by pacifier2012


What in the hell are you talking about?!! I'm a heterosexual woman, married, with grown children!!
Jeez, you people just really don't read the links, do you? Just launch into your crazy assumptions without giving any thought to the details of the issue, and then condemn everyone because you think you know.


Post fail.

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by StalkerSolent

 

Very valid points. And good questions.
To give a short answer instead of launching into a diatribe about "crazy", I'll just say that when people impose their beliefs (not 'share', but IMPOSE) on others, and those beliefs HURT PEOPLE, emotionally or physically, they should be stopped from doing so.

Are you familiar with the Westboro Baptist Church?
I really, really want to encourage you to watch "Jesus Camp", and look further into these things. What we need is sensible people who are vocally opposing the spread of bigoted, archaic, hell-fire teaching. Remember that these countries they are infiltrating are not well-educated, affluent people. They aren't dealing with "First World Problems" like westernized people are...they are struggling to survive.

edit on 20-3-2013 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)

Thanks

I agree that people should be stopped from hurting people physically, but I'm wary about the emotional bit. Emotional pain is a part of a normal life, IMHO, and people are going to hurt each other emotionally. It happens. My best advice is something along the lines of that "sticks and stones" ditty I used to recite.
And yeah, I know who Westboro is. Not exactly intimately acquainted, but I'm familiar with them. They're not doing me any favors, but I don't think they should be prohibited from protesting.

reply to post by StalkerSolent

I don't think they should be prohibited from protesting.

The UK has banned them from entry to their country.
Their protestations have hurt multiple people, and sorry to disagree, but emotional damage is very virulent and harmful.
It's what causes people like the WBC to behave the way they do.

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by StalkerSolent

 

I don't think they should be prohibited from protesting.

The UK has banned them from entry to their country.
Their protestations have hurt multiple people, and sorry to disagree, but emotional damage is very virulent and harmful.
It's what causes people like the WBC to behave the way they do.

Heh heh. The UK is a sovereign nation; they can do what they want in my book. But that's a tangent. I agree that emotional damage can be harmful, but I think people allow it to go too far too often. And I really don't think that we're going to be able to do anything about it without removing an essential part of what makes us human. Best thing to do is not to pass it on.

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by BlueMule

 

Yeah, they have. I'm not angry so much as passionate about this stuff.

(I knew I'd win you over eventually!

)

I'm sure they have, cutie! The trouble with passion is it can lead to the dark-side of the Force. Have you heard the story of the samurai whose duty was to avenge the murder of his overlord?

"His overlord had been killed, and his vow was, of course, absolute loyalty to this lord. And it was his duty now to kill the killer. Well, after considerable difficulties, he finally backs this fellow into a corner, and he is about to slay him with his *katana*, his sword, which is the symbol of his honor.

And the chap in the corner is angry and terrified, and he spits on the samurai, who sheathes his sword and walks away.

Now why did he do that?

He did that because this action made him angry, and it would have been a personal act to have killed that man in anger, and that would have destroyed the whole event." -Joseph Campbell

It's a hard lesson to learn... to act without action. Wu Wei.

"This is a mythological attitude. You are acting not in terms of your individual, personal life but with the sense of yourself as the priest, so to say, of a cosmic power which is operating through you, which we all are in circumstances, and the problem is to balance yourself against that and have a personality at the same time."

Let go, Luke.

But it's ok for me to act with passion. I'm Irish. When I fight it's all in good fun.

reply to post by StalkerSolent

Best thing to do is not to pass it on.

There you go!!
Don't spread it to other countries' most vulnerable populations, either!