I'll give you that.

Okay..."social fabric" is a good point.

Of course, NFL rivalries provide "social fabric" to their geographic regions...

Something you have to know about me: I use "Devil's Advocate" as a device to explore an issue. Everything you said was a good point. I'm not really disagreeing with any of it. Like you said, there is good and bad in everything.

It's just that, as religion has a bigger megaphone, I feel it's important to question it, even to attack it. In the name of balance...

Personally, I don't think it is up to me (or anyone) to define religion as good or bad. It is such a personal and variable thing, that a definative statement of good or bad isn't possible.

I couldn't care less if you want to worship a loaf of pumpernickel bread or your dog Spot...just as long as the form of your religion does not infringe on me and my rights. And vice versa, of course.

I do dislike the recruitment done by many religions. I think a much more powerful approach to getting people interested in what YOUR beliefs are is to BE someone admirable and inspirational. When people become curious as to what you believe in that gives you such peace, clarity, contentment, enlightenment and inner beauty, then you have effectively lived your testimony to your beliefs.

Stormie

Consider that in the separation of Church (religion) and State (government), government may represent management and religion may represent leadership. Leadership has been recognized as being distinct from management since Genghis Khan first wrote about it during his military campaigns 800 years ago; still, there is overlap between the two just as there is overlap between Church and State. Management [government] is more about the bottom line (i.e. surviving). Leadership [religion] is more about how you get there (i.e. thriving). Management [State] keeps you around for the next week, next month, and next year. Leadership [Church] keeps you around for the next decade, score, and century.

When either one is absent; or, disproportionate, the long term prognosis is poor. It is possible to consolidate the two; but, that simply hasn't been achieved yet. During the meantime, questioning Church and/or State can be productive; however, attacking either one could well be counterproductive. It may be advantageous to simply advocate the other.

When I say "attack" it, it's because I'm over-shooting. I know it can't be swayed, so I push hard as I can against it, hoping for the tiniest wiggle. And, of course, that has to be done with enough tact not to drive away the target audience, I realize that, but I'm not really trying to "recruit" anybody - that's what "religion" tries to do, I'm just hoping people might stop and think, that's all. But, what I won't do is pander to ingrained ideas simply because "that's the way it's done" . . . I stay firmly rooted in well-reasoned concepts that don't require social momentum to sustain them.

No Good or Bad
 

As a strict relativist, materialist, and one lacking "spirituality" alltogether, all I can say is that religion does exist, and it effects people. I try to avoid it. Many people I meet say the are "not religious" but they "are spiritual." I say 6of one and a half-dozen of another.

I know how to laugh, cry, and get angry, so I'm not an emotionless black hole; I just don't think we have a soul and I still don't really know what people mean by "spirituality." WTF is that? Judging from the word, it must, almost by definition, involve a "spirit" or "spirits."

And in regards to "spirituality," one guy that REALLY gets my dander up is below. What a bunch of shite!!:mad:
(sorry for the sad face, Flint).

http://www.wildfreshness.com/brian/archives/wdass.jpg

Who is the man in the picture?


I agree with pretty much everything you just said.
Pangloss have you ever read any of Richard Dawkins books?

Bad...Anyway, the religion you are thinking of is. That christain religiosity. But fanatical jhad-ism is bad too. I think any religion that closes the mind instead of opening it is bad.

IMHO, religion has been around to explain the unexplainable. When humans didn't know what caused thunder, there was Thor. When they didn't know why the sun travelled across the sky, there was Apollo. The two questions we don't know, these days, are

What are we before we're born and after we die?
and
What created matter/energy in the first place?

Religions say that God/gods created the universe, and try to explain the pre- and after-life. I'm skeptical about that

Religion is a social construct desigend for herding people into compliance with accepted standards, or consolidating the power of a ruling class. Religion is the institution, the practices of a codified system.

Spirituality is . . . harder to put your finger on. I will say this: I accept that there are things we don't, and can't, ever know about. Stephen Hawking cites, as a reason why he no longer believes that Physics can acheive a "Theory of Everything", the old paradox of "This statement is false" (if it's false, then it's true, but if it's true, then it was false - it contains an unresolvable contradiction within itself). Much in this same way, he notes that any theory that attempts to describe the universe is describing a universe which also contains us, the ones doing the describing, and therefore it is logically impossible for us to ever remove our own influsence and see a true picture. So, what does this have to do with spirituality? I believe spirituality deals with the unseen forces that we must accept exist, while, on the other hand, "religion" says it's got these forces all figured out, and tells you that it has the easy answers. Spirituality, on the other hand, acknowledges that we haven't got these answers. Spirituality is a recognition that there are things beyond our little human scope. It would be foolish and arrogant to assume otherwise.

So flint you didn't even quote my origianl response to you and neither did you quote me fully when I was talking to someone else. I said my brain quivered like jello. I am sure it is quite better to have exploding revelations than to have a brain of mush. Don't be such a baby 'cause I don't appreciate your childish ways. Thanks

I thought it was funny, but if you insist on taking it the wrong way, I'll take it off. I guess if you ask nicely would be the main thing. Like the BigV quote, it's a play on the new title lumberjim gave me. Just messing around, having fun, you know. No big deal, it's just the internet.

The only other thing I want to add is that you might want to consider getting on some kind of medication, you total fucking psycho.
<cute smilie intended to make it look like I was joking, so you can't get mad at me, although I really wasn't joking>

The same it true of pet owners and moderate cigar and pipe users.

What/whom you worship is spirituality... with whom and how you do it publicly is religion... a lot of what you discuss here is in the realm of spirituality.
The recruitment tactics and general behavior has nothing to do with their spiritual belief system IMO. "The Religion Of Peace" is a perfect example currently.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...leAdvisory.jpg

I agree with Flint on spirituality, but will add that it is personal. One can find guidance from others, but the practice/advancement of spirituality is done by one's self.
I say that you are incorrect on this point. I am a follower of Christ, as a teacher and enlightened one; but not a Christian, not by any stretch of the imagination.