When Will There Be Guaranteed Freedom From Persecution To Be Religious

[Apocalipstic]

Originally Posted by ruffryder

thanks for the thread Miss Tick. Here is one thread where I can expand my knowledge so ty everybody for thoughts. I didn't know all that Miss Tick.

So are we saying atheists can not run for office?? Or they can, but no one should know they are atheist?.. Oh I see, certain states. Are you asking how does this change? I think morals and religion can go hand in hand, am I wrong? Maybe it all should just be based on morality and ethics when it comes to issues of government and laws but then you have people arguing what is ethical and moral since we all differ on thoughts about this. Example : the death penalty.

I'm not sure where this thread is going yet but I agree those who run for a government office shouldn't have to be religious however I feel they should be tested on their morals and ethics with everyone agreeing what that should include in a government held position.

What happens when you have someone that is buddhist or muslim in a government position, does this change the morals or ethics?

Maybe I'm bringing up too much, but I'm just trying to understand what we are all talking about..

Thanks!

I think that religion should have no bearing on how someone carries out their oath of office and that religion should have no bearing on government what so ever. The Founding Fathers were not all Evangelical Christians as some would like us to believe.

But for many people, religion is more important than actually doing the right thing. They want to see someone their own denomination hold office. So it becomes about something other than ability to do the job in a moral and ethical manner.

[Daywalker]

Originally Posted by Apocalipstic

I believe in complete separation of church and state and in the US we don't have that...

Which always makes me wonder why State Colleges will allow any
Group to gather under a Religious notion, and then allow them
to Recruit or 'Honeymoon' new students. Many Cults have had
a field day with these allowances.

[ruffryder]

I'm sorry. I would like to answer my own question. LOL I guess if you believe in some or all of the "10 commandments" it doesn't have to be about God or religion to you if you are atheist. some of these commandments can fall into morals. right?

I was not getting at that anyone that doesn't believe in the commandments or follow them is immoral or not religious or even religious, just to make that clear.. anyway, any thoughts on that?

[Cin]

Originally Posted by ruffryder

10 Commandments

I am the Lord thy God, ... Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven images.

Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.

Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.

Honor thy father and thy mother.

Thou shalt not kill.

Thou shalt not commit adultery.

Thou shalt not steal.

Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.

Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house.

Are the 10 Commandments not conflating religion with morality ?
If you believe in these, is that not being somewhat religious?? I'm not saying it is so, I am asking opinions here. Thanks!

Well, I don't think it is conflating religion with morality. It is the ten commandments. It is religion. And a fine moral code as well.

The problem comes when people believe being religious is necessary in order to live by moral codes.

[Estella]

Originally Posted by Miss Tick

You say that like it's a bad thing.

Passion is never a bad thing.

[Apocalipstic]

Originally Posted by ruffryder

10 Commandments

I am the Lord thy God, ... Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven images.

Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.

Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.

Honor thy father and thy mother.

Thou shalt not kill.

Thou shalt not commit adultery.

Thou shalt not steal.

Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.

Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house.

Are the 10 Commandments not conflating religion with morality ?
If you believe in these, is that not being somewhat religious?? I'm not saying it is so, I am asking opinions here. Thanks!

Well, yes, the 10 comandments are in the Bible, hence religious.

However,

Just because you practice some of the ideas put forth in the 10 Commandments does not mean you are religious. These ideas for getting along as human and doing the right thing were present in writings older than the Bible.

Doing the right thing does not have to be religious. Am I making sense?

Originally Posted by Daywalker

I do not understand why someone would choose a Religion,
a supposed Core to their beliefs n such...then be
'afraid' to 'admit' their Choice.


Other than fearing for ones life in a crowd of (insert misc Religion) that
exudes abhorrence for their Chosen Religion...it just seems peculiar
to me to have a strong Religious belief in America
and not be able to disclose this safely.


Hence this thread, I guess.



I'm not Religious ~ My Core is Peace n Love ~ I Bless people from There.

Probably why some people hide being Gay, fear of persecution.

[Estella]

Originally Posted by Daywalker

[CENTER]I do not understand why someone would choose a Religion,
a supposed Core to their beliefs n such...then be
'afraid' to 'admit' their Choice.

I'm not an expert, but it doesn't seem like most people choose their religions. Most people, I believe, follow the religious beliefs they were born into, to some degree or another. Which is an extraordinarily powerful connection.

I've never met anyone afraid to admit their religious affiliation in public, but by the same token I live in a very liberal state. Which is not to say there is no discrimination here, but it may be far worse elsewhere. I have, however, met people who have hedged and dissembled when admitting that they are not believers. And I have never, ever heard a public figure do so.

[Apocalipstic]

Originally Posted by Fenchurch

I'm not an expert, but it doesn't seem like most people choose their religions. Most people, I believe, follow the religious beliefs they were born into, to some degree or another. Which is an extraordinarily powerful connection.

I've never met anyone afraid to admit their religious affiliation in public, but by the same token I live in a very liberal state. Which is not to say there is no discrimination here, but it may be far worse elsewhere. I have, however, met people who have hedged and dissembled when admitting that they are not believers. And I have never, ever heard a public figure do so.

In TN people hide a lot of things.

[Daywalker]

Originally Posted by Apocalipstic

In TN people hide a lot of things.

Having lived there for 5 years, I must concur.


Miss visiting U guysssssssss.

[EnderD_503]

Originally Posted by ruffryder

10 Commandments

I am the Lord thy God, ... Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

Kind of funny to bring this one up in a thread that is about the pressure atheists feel to be religious. Also taking into account christian privilege in many Western nations.

Originally Posted by ruffryder

Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven images.

Again, smacking of religious intolerance, as well as intolerance for those who are not religious or spiritual in any way.

Originally Posted by ruffryder

Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.

See above.

Originally Posted by ruffryder

Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.

See above. In many places in the Western world, many stores still close on Sundays in supposedly secular nations.

Originally Posted by ruffryder

Honor thy father and thy mother.

I will honour whoever I choose to honour. This kind of mentality contributes to what many abusers say to those they victimize. Particularly the children of abusive parents, who are so often told: "but they're father/mother. They love you no matter what they do." Gee, I wonder where that line of thinking comes from

Originally Posted by ruffryder

Thou shalt not kill.

I generally agree with this in the context of Western nations, except where immediate self-defense is concerned. Outside the context of stable Western nations, sometimes people need to be violent in order to insure the progression of their society or to insure their own survival.

Originally Posted by ruffryder

Thou shalt not commit adultery.

Normative monogamy, much?

Originally Posted by ruffryder

Thou shalt not steal.

Generally agree with this one...or would agree with it if current wealth distribution worldwide didn't leave certain people in extreme poverty. Somehow when a person is starving with little in the way of options and resources, their "moral code" changes...funny that. Or maybe it's society that needs to be reconsidering its "moral code."

Again, we're dealing with a sense of morality that only takes certain socio-economic situations into consideration.

Originally Posted by ruffryder

Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.

Agreed. However, I don't hold it against people who live in dictatorial situations, who sometimes end up doing these things to survive.

Originally Posted by ruffryder

Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house.

Might I add: nor his wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ass or anything that is thy neighbour's.

I suppose, then, that my neighbour is a slave-owning straight man who sees people as possessions. Suddenly, I just lost respect for my neighbour

Originally Posted by ruffryder

Are the 10 Commandments not conflating religion with morality ?
If you believe in these, is that not being somewhat religious?? I'm not saying it is so, I am asking opinions here. Thanks!

Thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal and thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour are conditional aspects of my own values that would be present in a Utopian society. But you know what they say about Utopias The others have some pretty horrible implications.

I would also like to point out that believing that murder is bad for society does not mean one has religious convictions. Neither does it mean that those values stem from the 10 commandments. These values predate judeo-christianity, and most human societies have placed consequences in place for such things as murder and theft since as far as we have evidence of human laws. These are not in anyway unique to christianity.

For myself, I really don't see these values as strictly moral, but as acts that require legal representation in order for society to progress.

[Cin]

I am not unaware of the dangers inherent in what is considered moral reasoning. So much damage has been done in the name of morality. Almost as much as has been done in the name of god. But can I hold morality or god morally responsible for the immorality often found in moral judgments?

Humanity itself is in dire need of a more socially conscious morality.

When talking to others it is most effective to use language that is meaningful to them. Right now in the U.S., and in Canada as well, that language is morality (I just read an article yesterday about whether Justin Trudeau is Catholic or Catholic enough to speak to students at a Catholic school), albeit the kind of morality heavily weighted with religious overtones.

When I speak of taking back morality from the exclusive use of the religious and incorporating it into the dialogue used by those of us with a social rather than religious conscience and agenda, I don’t mean to imply that a consideration of morality is a new idea for non religious people, nor am I even referring exclusively to non religious people. I just mean I’ve noticed that publicly and politically the moral high ground is often occupied by those of the religious right and those of the GOP while everyone else scrambles around trying to copy the same basic moral language. Which is difficult to do when one comes down on, what is deemed by the Right, as the morally incorrect side of an issue.

Often the answer to this dilemma has been to shy away from conversations or political speeches fraught with moral righteousness. While I tend to agree this would be most welcome, it will not be the tact of the religious right or the conservative party. So I advocate an about face. I am suggesting challenging the validity of their claims of moral superiority. I can think of endless ways that the Right does not act in ways that could ever by any measuring stick be considered moral, many that have been articulated quite clearly in this thread alone.

It would be in everyone’s best interest, religious or not, if our leaders and law makers who are possessed of a social conscience over a religious one would stop aping the tired morality spewed by the Right and begin, not only to clearly illuminate the moral weaknesses of the Right and show that the emperor is indeed without clothes, but to lead us toward a more just and equitable society.

[ruffryder]

Originally Posted by Miss Tick

I am not unaware of the dangers inherent in what is considered moral reasoning. So much damage has been done in the name of morality. Almost as much as has been done in the name of god. But can I hold morality or god morally responsible for the immorality often found in moral judgments?

Humanity itself is in dire need of a more socially conscious morality.

When talking to others it is most effective to use language that is meaningful to them. Right now in the U.S., and in Canada as well, that language is morality (I just read an article yesterday about whether Justin Trudeau is Catholic or Catholic enough to speak to students at a Catholic school), albeit the kind of morality heavily weighted with religious overtones.

No doubt someone speaking about religion will get debated for and against about whether they "qualify" to speak on the subject, especially to children.

If you don't mind Miss, who is Justin Trudeau? Why is he getting heat about speaking to students at a Catholic school?

This reminded me of the members at the Vatican or even churches across the world being so religious and so moral, but yet they are found guilty of child sexual abuse.

[EnderD_503]

Originally Posted by ruffryder

If you don't mind Miss, who is Justin Trudeau? Why is he getting heat about speaking to students at a Catholic school?

He is the son of Pierre Trudeau and an MP in Papineau. He's also an excellent writer, as is his brother, Sasha Trudeau.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...4/?from=sec431

[ruffryder]

Thanks Ender

In that article I find this,

“First of all, my question, is: who is the faith police? Who are the people who are supposed to be judging somebody's faith?” said Trevor Digby, department chair of Canadian and world studies at Holy Cross Secondary School. “Is that not a private matter? When we invite speakers, we don't go out and do a police record check on their faith, unless they've done something outrageous.”


“We haven't called them to speak about a theological issue, we've called them to speak on inspiring young people to international service and their place in leadership now in society and make a better world,” Mr. Digby said. “That our minister of Parliament would have a problem with that I think speaks more about him than about Justin Trudeau.”

I say good grief. Let The guy speak. He is an inspiration for even wanting to go speak to kids in my book.

[Glenn]

Pardon me Miss Tick; Are you asking for signs and wonders? Even Jesus Christ could'nt teach us successfully, while on Earth, what you ask of mankind's mere logic and reasoning abililties regarding the true nature of God.

[Apocalipstic]

Even in a thread about persecution for not being religious, we are falling into discussing it all from a Christian standpoint and using Christian language.

Our calendar, holidays, tv programing....so much of our culture. It KILLS me when I turn on the History Channel and they use the Bible as a historical textbook. Christian bias is definitely there in media.

I actually know people who think Atheists kill children.

We don't actually know definitely and concretely that Jesus ever even existed.

[Apocalipstic]

Ender, thank you for what you said about Honoring Parents and child abuse. I run up on this a lot.

[Estella]

Originally Posted by Apocalipstic

I actually know people who think Atheists kill children.

We don't actually know definitely and concretely that Jesus ever even existed.

Well, I think we're all aware that, "Feminism is a socialist, anti-family, political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism, and become lesbians." According to Pat Robertson, at any rate.

I subscribed to a certain degree of skepticism about Jesus' existence at one time, but it seems to me that there are really quite a few sources that confirm his place as an historical figure. Of course, I do not believe that he was the son of any sort of god. What I do believe is that Jesus was a culturally important philosopher who paid rather too high a price for suggesting that we might all want to be nice to one another now and again. But I don't need to believe in a sky-god to share that philosophy.

[SoNotHer]

"Every religion is true one way or another. It is true when understood metaphorically. But when it gets stuck in its own metaphors, interpreting them as facts, then you are in trouble."

-Joseph Campbell

[Apocalipstic]

Originally Posted by Fenchurch

I subscribed to a certain degree of skepticism about Jesus' existence at one time, but it seems to me that there are really quite a few sources that confirm his place as an historical figure. Of course, I do not believe that he was the son of any sort of god. What I do believe is that Jesus was a culturally important philosopher who paid rather too high a price for suggesting that we might all want to be nice to one another now and again. But I don't need to believe in a sky-god to share that philosophy.

Are there really? Sources outside of the Bible, I mean.

I am not saying Jesus did not exist, or that I don't think he is a culturally important, or that I don't agree with you overall. Just the actual proof seems flimsy at best. Zero actual eye wittness accounts, zero artifacts......