Religious fundamentalism could soon be treated as mental illness

Originally posted by OpinionatedB
reply to post by ATSmediaPRO

 

who is more mentally ill? One who dreams of saving what we don't have the knowledge to save and ends up only causing pain and harm which in the end does little? Or one who says I have no control, lets put it in the hands of One Who they believe does?

I'm sorry that your sister has an ailment that cannot be cured. I wish her the best. That doesn't change this posters stance though. I still believe that the latter of the two options you gave would have to be the mentally ill of the two. Personally, I don't put a lot of stock in doctors when it comes to the type of aliment that your sister has. I truly believe they're fishing in the dark, and using human beings as bait.

That aside, at least people can lay their heads down at night knowing that they tried something tangible. This treatment may not have worked on your sister, but it has worked on others and it can be proven. Prayer works too. This is an intangible though, therefor, cannot be proven like medical practices can be. Many physicians are starting to realize though that prayer, which stems from belief, can cause cures to happen when they thought that a cure was improbable.

I look at prayer as a form of positive thought. Looking at it that way, not putting a deity behind it that I have to have faith exists in order for it to work, keeps things on a very even keel for me. It keeps the positive thoughts more impersonal in a way. With religion, you start with having having faith, then you work your way up to having an unwavering faith, then adamant and then finally, extreme. This is where the emotion behind the faith gets dangerous. This is where you put absolutely no stock in the abilities of people, and put all of your stock into something that only exists because of faith. This is where people cross the line and do dangerous things to other people. Even their own kids.

I have a family member who has a physical ailment that cannot be cured. It can only be treated to the point where that family member can still live a productive life. Do we wish it could be cured? Of course. But just because it can't, the person with the ailment is not going to throw logic to the wind, abandon the treatment and go digging for the gold. A logical person is going to try what has worked for other people first.

Besides which, if your God was so powerful that he could help someone who didn't want medical care, why wasn't he so powerful to make sure that medical care advanced with the rate of diseases and medical conditions, to where they could be cured and not just treated? And don't give that tripe about how God puts mountains in our way so we can learn how to climb. All we do, collectively, is blow them up so we can take the easy road.

Religious extremism is dangerous,(and it doesn't matter what religion it is) it's detrimental to an evolving society and it needs to be stopped. If that means deeming it to be a mental illness, so be it. Personally, I would go a different route, but if the ends justify the means, then mentally ill they are.

reply to post by ATSmediaPRO


Its is conceivable that religious fundamentalism, facilitates the expression of certain maladaptive behaviours that an individual may have a predisposition towards .

Obsessive Compulsive Disorders and ritualistic cleanliness and purity comes to mind.

reply to post by tothetenthpower


Thanks for your kind reply.

I much appreciate any amount of authentic dialogue with you.

Certainly blackwashing any group--so seemingly without reason, without substance, without thought to the consequences . . . can be overly rife here and elsewhere.

There are solid reasons to point out horrific problems whether they be with Islam or "Christianity."

However, to leap from there to blanket blackwashing without any rational discriminating between specifics and context is foolhardy as well as dangerous and destructive, imho.

It's somewhat as the old China missionary told me . . . he was in China in the early 50's--one of the last ones out after Mao took over. His colleagues came to him joyful that the Commies were suppressing and worse the Buddhists. My friend cautioned his colleagues that he did not realize what he was saying or describing.

Sooner or later, the bell tolls for all.

And too often it tolls sooner for those who are oblivious about the bell holder and the bell ringer's motives, goals, agenda.


Thx again.

Originally posted by ATSmediaPRO
I hate to say this but if religious fundamentalism is treated as a mental illness, then the mental health professionals have lost the plot. Who's going to decide what's ok to believe?

Thanks for the topic and lively discussion. I think it is correct to say to label 'religious fundamentalism as a form of mental illness is a very broad stroke. When a person, a group is intolerant of another and advocates principles that could cause harm not only to its members or to anyone who does not believe in their principles is wrong and not acceptable behaviour. It is fair to say these beliefs, practices are radical, fanatical and are basically suffering with a delusion which can be caused by having a mental illness.

However it is something that needs careful research and a specific understanding to separate the ill, dysfunctional mental stability of an individual. Then make the next leap that a religion in its fundamental form is a vehicle, instrument that enhances or causes an individual to have extreme, radical views that may cause harm upon themselves and/or others.

Most of us know evil when we see it or are exposed to it. Most of us know what is considered acceptable behavior the right or wrong choices when we see it or are exposed to it.

But to broadly label fundamentalism of any religion as a mental illness, and hence anyone who believes in fundamental religion as having a mental illness, I believe is incorrect and to say such, is in and of itself extreme and radical.

Personally, through my own free will, through learning, experiencing and then choosing not to adopt the views of any one religion but rather a Spiritual approach in my own belief system, is my choice and no one has the right to say I cannot believe this way, or to do so should be classified as having a mental illness.

If we wish to start labeling and empirically stating that one's beliefs are a mental illness:

men·tal ill·ness (men'tăl il'nĕs) Broadly inclusive term, generally denoting one or all of the following: 1) a disease of the brain, with predominant behavioral symptoms; as in paresis 2) a disease of the "mind" or personality, evidenced by abnormal behavior, as in hysteria or schizophrenia.

And we think that belief system is wrong, again, I am talking about the broad definition of trying to label some religious behavior as a mental illness or having a defect..........then how far are we as a society, as a civilization of taking the next behavior we don't feel fits the 'desired' behavior or acceptable, preferred behavior to the next extreme....:
Eugenics:

Eugenics is the bio-social movement which advocates practices to improve the genetic composition of a population, usually a human population.It is a social philosophy advocating the improvement of human hereditary traits through the promotion of higher reproduction of more desired people and traits, and reduced reproduction of less desired people and traits

This has been tried before and has been discussed rather vigorously by scientists and intellectuals as a possible method to improve humanity. Hitler certainly in one context believed this. Also Nikola Tesla had thoughts and discussed this approach as an acceptable way to improve humanity.

So where does it stop? Where does one group start eliminating or classifying another group as having a mental illness? and then what do we want to do about it? Label it what you want....to broadly call a whole group of people with having a mental illness....not sure we want to go down that road.

My feeling is what I have always felt, and I will equate it with radical islamic fanatics. These individuals have been taught this and have been cut off from the freedom of learning altering views, the freedom to see other cultures...simply the ability to have the freedom to learn and to be educated. So, this will be a long term problem to solve requiring behavioral changes, society changes and most important of all the freedom for children, women and all to have the freedom and rights to learn and choose for themselves how they wish to live 'their' lives and not be deprived of basic social and civic rights that many of us enjoy. Peace!! ID!!

reply to post by ATSmediaPRO


Exactly, mental illness, may also not be based on an individual basis, but could be something that is spread
between other individuals, so all individuals end up doing the same thing

Fundamentalist religious extremism *IS* a form of mental illness.

It is a form of controlling that portion of the population that is susceptible.

That small slice of the religious ARE mentally deficient.

Originally posted by ItDepends

And we think that belief system is wrong, again, I am talking about the broad definition of trying to label some religious behavior as a mental illness or having a defect..........then how far are we as a society, as a civilization of taking the next behavior we don't feel fits the 'desired' behavior or acceptable, preferred behavior to the next extreme....:
Eugenics:

Eugenics is the bio-social movement which advocates practices to improve the genetic composition of a population, usually a human population.It is a social philosophy advocating the improvement of human hereditary traits through the promotion of higher reproduction of more desired people and traits, and reduced reproduction of less desired people and traits

This has been tried before and has been discussed rather vigorously by scientists and intellectuals as a possible method to improve humanity. Hitler certainly in one context believed this. Also Nikola Tesla had thoughts and discussed this approach as an acceptable way to improve humanity.

You start with behavior that is both peaceful and productive for a society, and go from there. The only reason people think eugenics is extreme is because they think there is way for people of all faiths, beliefs, ideologies, and temperaments to get along peacefully. We can't. We keep trying different methods, and we keep failing. And we keep trying different methods because we don't have the stomach for the real solution. The real solution would call for less diversity and more peace. The reason why people like Hitler fail at this is pretty obvious. The reason people like Tesla fail is because people like Edison steal their thunder. And the reason societies fail to see how this could be beneficial is because they keep focusing on the failures of a few crackpots like Hitler.

The fact that people can argue that they would rather have diversity over peace is pretty telling. While the arguments keep raging, extremists keep breeding and they keep the population with hateful people who want less diversity and will kill others to see it happen.

reply to post by BO XIAN

No, it is clear that the USSC stated that choosing no religion is protected under the First amendment but it did not state that atheism is a religion. You have to spin it to make it look that way.

Any examples that you can point to and say "look they are acting just like a religion" don't change that fact.

New Edit Posted

Originally posted by Rosha


Edit:Found a link

This one was posted to the Guardian on Blair..on common dreams:
www.commondreams.org...

edit on 10-8-2013 by Rosha because: (no reason given)

Thanks for the links. The second one was funny.

How can someone who believes god is speaking to him be allowed to run a country? Shouldn't he be in a mental institution?

The Medical trades are trying to expand their client base, call those who do not agree with your deceit crazy and nobody will listen to them. Nothing more to this than that. If you do not conform to the norm of society of the time and talk about it, you are considered skitzo, this is old school, only the norm is changing.

If so then homosexuality should be treated as a mental illness as well, more so actually. Let's start there.

Originally posted by Leonidas
Fundamentalist religious extremism *IS* a form of mental illness.

It is a form of controlling that portion of the population that is susceptible.

That small slice of the religious ARE mentally deficient.

I understand what you are saying, and not necessarily disagreeing, but IS "the Extreme Fundamental religion" the problem? Or is it the fanatical, radical, extremist followers that are mentally ill? Or both.

Just a question out loud, (and I do not endorse any religion) but if a 'religion' were to profess, goodness, love, care for their fellowman/woman and just try to be the best person you can be, But then you have a person or a group of persons take that understanding and twist it and if ANY one who does not follow and/or believe that and try to convert, force or then insanely try to kill people because they don't do what they like, isn't the mental illness to be placed on that person or group of persons who radicalized a fundamental belief? While at the same time, a great majority followers of the 'said' religion are just good normal people who believe in a way of life based upon principles as laid out in the 'said' religion, are they mentally ill too?

Edit Note: I believe this is correct, I am unaware of any organized religion that declares itself as you state as
"Fundamentalist religious extremism". In a quick look up the top organized religions in the world are: Christianity at approx. 2.2 Bil., Islam at approx. 1.7 Bil, Buddhism at approx. 1.2 Bil., and Hinduism at approx. 1.0 Billion. So a rough total of approx 6.5 Billion followers. Then there are dozens of smaller religions cults of about several hundred followers and as small as just a handful.

So if we just focus on the top 4 that implies there are approx. 6.5 billion followers of an organized religion. There are approx. 7.2 Billion people on earth. So if we follow the logic to it's extreme, according to some peoples thinking almost almost 91% of the human population on earth has a mental illness.

Source of Followers of Religions

World Population Estimate Source

reply to post by ATSmediaPRO


First they came for the fundamentalists....

This is pretty damn scary, just like standard psychiatry, it invents illnesses that are not illnesses and for profit or politics they use them to do more harm to society than the very things they claim to prevent.
Classic case of elites that think they know best, and in their arrogance claim to be able to tell others what is right or wrong, but not only tell them, force upon them their elitist delusions using medicine/science/law and religion.

Originally posted by Taupin Desciple

Originally posted by OpinionatedB
reply to post by ATSmediaPRO

 

who is more mentally ill? One who dreams of saving what we don't have the knowledge to save and ends up only causing pain and harm which in the end does little? Or one who says I have no control, lets put it in the hands of One Who they believe does?

I'm sorry that your sister has an ailment that cannot be cured. I wish her the best. That doesn't change this posters stance though. I still believe that the latter of the two options you gave would have to be the mentally ill of the two. Personally, I don't put a lot of stock in doctors when it comes to the type of aliment that your sister has. I truly believe they're fishing in the dark, and using human beings as bait.

All we do, collectively, is blow them up so we can take the easy road.

Religious extremism is dangerous,(and it doesn't matter what religion it is) it's detrimental to an evolving society and it needs to be stopped. If that means deeming it to be a mental illness, so be it. Personally, I would go a different route, but if the ends justify the means, then mentally ill they are.

Actually, she is my daughter. I do thank you for your sentiment and care.

Lets discuss from here.

Now, as you say, when we go to doctors at least we are doing something that has some chance of working while of course fully admitting prayer can also have a chance. Now, let me postulate this:

I have a daughter who is ill and I pump her full of poisonous chemicals that darn near kill her and make her so sick she can hardly function, all in the hopes I can kill what is making her sick..... Hell I would go to jail, possibly for life and never be allowed to see my daughter again most certainly...

But a doctor can do it... hell he was trained to "practice" using my daughter as a guinea pig and for this we shell out thousands upon thousands of dollars - BELIEVING that he may save her right? That's a belief and put that way it sounds so horribly insane....

Doesn't sound any different than a faith healer raping a person for all their wealth for a belief and a hope....

For both the doctor and the faith healer you are taking it on faith and word of mouth that one or the other can provide some measure of results... it is faith and belief and hope for both.

As to your question why does God allow pain and suffering, why is not every single disease cured and so forth, that is outside the scope of this particular thread so there is truly no point in getting into it other than to say this is something everyone must answer for themselves... It is something I asked more than you can imagine when I got hurt to the point I live in unimaginable pain for the rest of my days.... it is also something I have answered for myself...

For me, I personally believe that God gave us intellect and intelligence to be used for our better rather than our detriment and I am happily able to say that while the life of my daughter is in the Hand of God I believe what little knowledge we have as humans it should be utilized and it does not conflict with religion or spirituality. But that is my personal belief, it is not everyone's nor does everyone or even anyone have to share my beliefs.

Now, while the atheist camp would like me to be declared insane because I have a belief in God and declare it as being "harmful" to society, it should not be overlooked what religious individuals have contributed to society. It is, after all most of the people you have ever met or read about...

If you say harmful, then what of legal killing of infants who can survive outside of the womb? How do the same people who believe this is a wonderful right get off telling others what their morals should be and how to care for their own children?

Everyone has a right to their own belief.... it is not our right to decide who is and who is not insane.... when they effect you and yours, then you can say something. You cannot lay blanket blame on most of the population of the earth for the actions of a very few.

I have met people from all walks and beliefs and non-beliefs that I thought were nutty as fruit cakes... but I cannot judge them, I do not expect to be judged upon anything other than my actions, and I do not expect everyone to agree with them all. We were not meant to be automatons all following the leader, we were meant to be individuals and in our uniqueness we contribute to the good of one another.....

By the way, the end never justifies the means.... it is not the end that matters, but everything you do in between

Originally posted by OpinionatedB

By the way, the end never justifies the means.... it is not the end that matters, but everything you do in between

I starred you for your convictions because they are honorable.

But... Isnt it the childs choice to make.

Medicine has a far greater proven success rate than faith in regards to treating illness, so it must count as a least a ray of hope. Healing by faith alone is so rare its considered a miracle.
I understand the harm done by chemotherapy and radiotherapy but they do have a success rate. I know 2 people personally that are still alive today due to those treatments. It certainly wasnt faith that saved them.

As a parent myself I would consider all options in saving the life of one of my children. Its the least I could do for them.

You are welcome to your standpoint, but remember its your standpoint, not your childs, You have to give your child the freedom to chose their own path, not inflict yours upon theirs. That goes against all the principles of freedom.

reply to post by OneManArmy

For me, I personally believe that God gave us intellect and intelligence to be used for our better rather than our detriment and I am happily able to say that while the life of my daughter is in the Hand of God I believe what little knowledge we have as humans it should be utilized and it does not conflict with religion or spirituality. But that is my personal belief, it is not everyone's nor does everyone or even anyone have to share my beliefs.

My belief concerning doctors is above, quoted from my last post. There is a hadith that says "Seek knowledge even if you have to go as far as China" We are to spend our lives from cradle to grave seeking knowledge... I do not believe that is for no reason... knowledge is to be utilized.

As humans even in failure we learn, so if nothing else perhaps we can learn something from our failures in the medical field as well as others fields as well...

My point was that everyone should be free to choose.... and we encourage our children all according to what it is we believe.... If left to MY child she would not have gone through all this.... it was myself and my mother to encourage her toward this end....She never wanted anything the doctor had to offer.... Was I wrong to do so? Most will say no, but some might....

Can I say someone who would choose differently or believes differently is wrong? I cannot say wrong, just a different choice than the one I would make.... but not wrong...I am not the one who can say anything about right or wrong...

I have learned a lot lately about different types of people.... I met on this board a wonderful and intelligent person who is homosexual.... can I say right or wrong? Is it my right to say? Or can and should I just judge them according to their own actions.....I met on this board Christians... one of whom I married... lol... Can I say he is right or wrong? Is it my right to say? Or do I just judge him for his actions......as well as the other Christians I have met....

I do not have to agree with everything everyone does or believes, all I have to do is see what is good in others and live my life the very best I can according to what I believe....

We cannot label people simply because we disagree with the way they think or the things they believe. Everyone has their own definition, and has to live according to it.

How about the science nuts who believe that the whole Universe came from a singular point of NOTHINGNESS the size of a dot on paper . What a crock .

reply to post by SimonPeter


I know right?! They should believe in talking snakes and bushes, those makes a lot more sense.