Comments on: Is freedom of religion under attack? http://www.theonlinerant.com/2007/10/22/is-freedom-of-religion-under-attack/ Jamie's thoughts, ideas, and struggles Wed, 14 Apr 2010 00:26:31 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Alexander http://www.theonlinerant.com/2007/10/22/is-freedom-of-religion-under-attack/comment-page-1/#comment-79 Alexander Fri, 09 Nov 2007 19:22:43 +0000 http://www.theonlinerant.com/2007/10/22/is-freedom-of-religion-under-attack/#comment-79 I see: targeted are unexperienced students, "the atheists and agnostics" and the "very large percentage of those people [that] do not really know what Christianity is". Then it seeems to be a matter of education, of tolerance and of true Christianity. Probably the discussion shouldn't seen as much as a menace but as a challenge by religions and religious people. Why not taking the chance for a self-analysis and for possible meliorations? If real Christians, as you tell, are such a minority (?) your appeal for voting "right" could probably be not very successfull... But I think religions could (and should) ask themselves how to present in society and how to support education, tolerance and (good) information. This approach I would consider more positive and constructive than just fear of "overwhelming counterforce" :-) A good religion that is inspiring people and helping them to become "good" and lucky should have always enough support not to be seriously (!) attacked or even suppressed. At least in a free and tolerant society. And everybody should help to maintain this tolerance and freedom. For the benefit of all. I see: targeted are unexperienced students, “the atheists and agnostics” and the “very large percentage of those people [that] do not really know what Christianity is”.

Then it seeems to be a matter of education, of tolerance and of true Christianity.

Probably the discussion shouldn’t seen as much as a menace but as a challenge by religions and religious people.

Why not taking the chance for a self-analysis and for possible meliorations?

If real Christians, as you tell, are such a minority (?) your appeal for voting “right” could probably be not very successfull…

But I think religions could (and should) ask themselves how to present in society and how to support education, tolerance and (good) information.

This approach I would consider more positive and constructive than just fear of “overwhelming counterforce” :-)

A good religion that is inspiring people and helping them to become “good” and lucky should have always enough support not to be seriously (!) attacked or even suppressed.
At least in a free and tolerant society.

And everybody should help to maintain this tolerance and freedom.
For the benefit of all.

]]> By: Jamie Barrows http://www.theonlinerant.com/2007/10/22/is-freedom-of-religion-under-attack/comment-page-1/#comment-78 Jamie Barrows Fri, 09 Nov 2007 19:11:50 +0000 http://www.theonlinerant.com/2007/10/22/is-freedom-of-religion-under-attack/#comment-78 I was certainly not meaning to imply that agnostics had not thought out their beliefs. So I'm sorry if it sounded like that. I would say that most people who claim the title agnostic have actually thought out their beliefs. Mainly because the term is not commonly used, and most people don't know what it means. So if they are using it, then they more than likely have thought out their belief system. I was only saying that many of those identifying themselves as Christian, are really agnostic or atheist when the individual beliefs are nailed down. And I totally agree that everyone needs to come to God(in whatever form they believe he exists) on their own and in their own way. As a Christian, I believe that the right way is through Jesus. But that is a belief that I had to come to on my own. Not something that could be forced on me. I was certainly not meaning to imply that agnostics had not thought out their beliefs. So I’m sorry if it sounded like that.

I would say that most people who claim the title agnostic have actually thought out their beliefs. Mainly because the term is not commonly used, and most people don’t know what it means. So if they are using it, then they more than likely have thought out their belief system.

I was only saying that many of those identifying themselves as Christian, are really agnostic or atheist when the individual beliefs are nailed down.

And I totally agree that everyone needs to come to God(in whatever form they believe he exists) on their own and in their own way. As a Christian, I believe that the right way is through Jesus. But that is a belief that I had to come to on my own. Not something that could be forced on me.

]]> By: Heidi http://www.theonlinerant.com/2007/10/22/is-freedom-of-religion-under-attack/comment-page-1/#comment-76 Heidi Fri, 09 Nov 2007 18:44:54 +0000 http://www.theonlinerant.com/2007/10/22/is-freedom-of-religion-under-attack/#comment-76 Hmmm. Interesting argument going on here. I agree that most people - even if they self-identify with a specific religious "brand" - do not really know very much about their own religion. On the other hand, some agnostics might have thought things out more. My husband calls himself an atheist - not because he doesn't intuit a larger reality, but because he finds religious movements of various kinds to so often be manipulations of other interests that he's tired of it. My own view is that there are many paths to God. I tend to feel that a lifelong quest may have more value than settling into a particular affiliation. Of course, you lose the large community aspect of it all, which is a big reason that a lot of people join churches in the first place. But I think that we have different paths, as we have different bodies and different minds. The question is: what do we do with religious questions, spiritual experiences, ethics, and so on? How you navigate these things shapes who you are, makes certain things habitual, creates who you are - for yourself, and in the eyes of your deity. Hmmm. Interesting argument going on here.

I agree that most people – even if they self-identify with a specific religious “brand” – do not really know very much about their own religion. On the other hand, some agnostics might have thought things out more. My husband calls himself an atheist – not because he doesn’t intuit a larger reality, but because he finds religious movements of various kinds to so often be manipulations of other interests that he’s tired of it.

My own view is that there are many paths to God. I tend to feel that a lifelong quest may have more value than settling into a particular affiliation. Of course, you lose the large community aspect of it all, which is a big reason that a lot of people join churches in the first place.

But I think that we have different paths, as we have different bodies and different minds. The question is: what do we do with religious questions, spiritual experiences, ethics, and so on? How you navigate these things shapes who you are, makes certain things habitual, creates who you are – for yourself, and in the eyes of your deity.

]]> By: Jamie Barrows http://www.theonlinerant.com/2007/10/22/is-freedom-of-religion-under-attack/comment-page-1/#comment-73 Jamie Barrows Fri, 09 Nov 2007 17:37:43 +0000 http://www.theonlinerant.com/2007/10/22/is-freedom-of-religion-under-attack/#comment-73 Arguments do not have to be all that convincing, if the schools teach them as fact. Most students believe what the school books and the teachers tell them. And the arguments are not targeted at Christians or religious people. They are targeted at atheists and agnostics. While many in the US identify with Christianity, a very large percentage of those people do not really know what Christianity is. And when their beliefs are actually narrowed down, they are mostly agnostic or atheist. They have simply not thought out their beliefs enough to identify them. Mainly because they don't care enough about religion to truly think about were they stand. Those kind of people are in the Majority. And that group is who is being targeted here. Arguments do not have to be all that convincing, if the schools teach them as fact. Most students believe what the school books and the teachers tell them.
And the arguments are not targeted at Christians or religious people. They are targeted at atheists and agnostics.
While many in the US identify with Christianity, a very large percentage of those people do not really know what Christianity is. And when their beliefs are actually narrowed down, they are mostly agnostic or atheist. They have simply not thought out their beliefs enough to identify them. Mainly because they don’t care enough about religion to truly think about were they stand. Those kind of people are in the Majority. And that group is who is being targeted here.

]]> By: Alexander http://www.theonlinerant.com/2007/10/22/is-freedom-of-religion-under-attack/comment-page-1/#comment-72 Alexander Fri, 09 Nov 2007 17:08:29 +0000 http://www.theonlinerant.com/2007/10/22/is-freedom-of-religion-under-attack/#comment-72 Do you really consider those arguments so convincing that in few years the majority of people in USA (that after my knowledge nowadays feels religious and christian) will be against religion and suppress (!) it?! Are people so stupid? Is religion so weak? :-) Do you really consider those arguments so convincing that in few years the majority of people in USA (that after my knowledge nowadays feels religious and christian) will be against religion and suppress (!) it?!

Are people so stupid?
Is religion so weak?

:-)

]]> By: Jamie Barrows http://www.theonlinerant.com/2007/10/22/is-freedom-of-religion-under-attack/comment-page-1/#comment-71 Jamie Barrows Fri, 09 Nov 2007 14:34:49 +0000 http://www.theonlinerant.com/2007/10/22/is-freedom-of-religion-under-attack/#comment-71 There is always a danger that anything that the schools are teaching and the media is claiming, will begin to be believed by the general population. So my worry is that with the schools beginning to teach that religion is actually harmful to society, people will start believing it. Once a majority of people believe that something is harmful to society, people will start openly trying to outlaw or suppress it. That is what I worry about. It may be 5 to 10 years from now before that can happen, but it is still a danger. There is always a danger that anything that the schools are teaching and the media is claiming, will begin to be believed by the general population. So my worry is that with the schools beginning to teach that religion is actually harmful to society, people will start believing it.
Once a majority of people believe that something is harmful to society, people will start openly trying to outlaw or suppress it. That is what I worry about. It may be 5 to 10 years from now before that can happen, but it is still a danger.

]]> By: Alexander http://www.theonlinerant.com/2007/10/22/is-freedom-of-religion-under-attack/comment-page-1/#comment-70 Alexander Fri, 09 Nov 2007 09:17:30 +0000 http://www.theonlinerant.com/2007/10/22/is-freedom-of-religion-under-attack/#comment-70 I think we (and many other people) do agree that religion can be very good - for the individual and for society. And we do agree that there is (in every religion) the danger of extremism what most people don't want. As you describe S. Harris's statements they are very striking, very "black or white". A common way to get publicity... and the media like this very much. But fortunately reality is diverse, is much more differentiated. See the world, see history in many countries: it will never be possible to prohibit religion and religiousness! Even very dictatorial systems didn't succeed really in eliminating religion. And our societies are ("thank God":-) far away from this! That this discussion is arising for me is not so very surprising, seeing a world where people and ("religious") leaders are trying to justify murder, terrorism and war by "religion". For many people this may be a very threatening aspect. But of course that is not what the very most religious people want. I think this discussion might be a good chance for religions to show and to point out still better and stronger their positive aspects - for individuals and for society. And there are many good aspects! I just didn't conceive very well: what are your concrete preoccupations? What do you think could really happen in bad or in worst case? I think we (and many other people) do agree that religion can be very good – for the individual and for society. And we do agree that there is (in every religion) the danger of extremism what most people don’t want.
As you describe S. Harris’s statements they are very striking, very “black or white”. A common way to get publicity… and the media like this very much.

But fortunately reality is diverse, is much more differentiated. See the world, see history in many countries: it will never be possible to prohibit religion and religiousness!
Even very dictatorial systems didn’t succeed really in eliminating religion.
And our societies are (“thank God”:-) far away from this!

That this discussion is arising for me is not so very surprising, seeing a world where people and (“religious”) leaders are trying to justify murder, terrorism and war by “religion”.
For many people this may be a very threatening aspect.
But of course that is not what the very most religious people want.

I think this discussion might be a good chance for religions to show and to point out still better and stronger their positive aspects – for individuals and for society.
And there are many good aspects!

I just didn’t conceive very well: what are your concrete preoccupations? What do you think could really happen in bad or in worst case?

]]> By: Jamie Barrows http://www.theonlinerant.com/2007/10/22/is-freedom-of-religion-under-attack/comment-page-1/#comment-69 Jamie Barrows Thu, 08 Nov 2007 23:10:28 +0000 http://www.theonlinerant.com/2007/10/22/is-freedom-of-religion-under-attack/#comment-69 The statements themselves, are not what I'm worried about. It's the fact that they are being given credence and respect by influential people that worries me. Sam Harris claims that religion, specifically Christianity and Islam, should not be tolerated by society at all! Not just that extremism and hate should not be tolerated, but normal mainstream religion should not be tolerated. he claims that mainstream moderate Christianity is nothing but a cover for extremism and should not be allowed in rational society. He clearly states that those who believe in God are not to be trusted and are mentally unstable. He also states that anyone who believes in God should not be allowed to hold public office. That's a big difference from just having a "less irrational occupation with religion." Again, nothing he says is really "new." People have said such things in the past. My worry is that important people in the US educational system and the media are paying a lot of attention and respect to his statements. The statements themselves, are not what I’m worried about. It’s the fact that they are being given credence and respect by influential people that worries me.
Sam Harris claims that religion, specifically Christianity and Islam, should not be tolerated by society at all! Not just that extremism and hate should not be tolerated, but normal mainstream religion should not be tolerated. he claims that mainstream moderate Christianity is nothing but a cover for extremism and should not be allowed in rational society. He clearly states that those who believe in God are not to be trusted and are mentally unstable. He also states that anyone who believes in God should not be allowed to hold public office. That’s a big difference from just having a “less irrational occupation with religion.”
Again, nothing he says is really “new.” People have said such things in the past. My worry is that important people in the US educational system and the media are paying a lot of attention and respect to his statements.

]]> By: Alexander http://www.theonlinerant.com/2007/10/22/is-freedom-of-religion-under-attack/comment-page-1/#comment-68 Alexander Thu, 08 Nov 2007 21:14:52 +0000 http://www.theonlinerant.com/2007/10/22/is-freedom-of-religion-under-attack/#comment-68 I was really (and seriously) astonished about your "appeal". I always considered the USA as a very religious (in various senses...) nation. Isn't there a great common sense about the "goodness" of religion? Probably you have different discussions in your society than we have. And if some publish statements as you cite them in your post - do you really fear that this could "affect" seriously the freedom of religious people?!? There are extremists on "both" sides. Extremists that want to build theocra"z"y and others who consider religion as harmful or bad. But I trust that in our free cultures no one of those extremists will win. I consider it as very important to cultivate very seriously the tolerance that everybody can handle this as he wants to do it - everybody respecting the borders of the others. I hadn't heard of Sam Harris before, I just now read about him in Wikipedia. Do you know this article? As I understand it he is especially against extreme religiousness (and against moderate that is covering that extremism). I think (with all restrictions knowing only this Wikipedia-article) that he is recommending just a less irrational occupation with religion (e.g. not just believing all that e.g. religious leaders tell you) to avoid hate and intolerance spread under the disguise of religion. For me it doesn't seem really a statement against religion in general more against intolerance and presumptuousness. But I surely don't know the details (and the articles by him in the big journals or his TV-appearances). I think different opinions are valuable to revise my owns. And I believe in the power of the good! In freedom. I was really (and seriously) astonished about your “appeal”.
I always considered the USA as a very religious (in various senses…) nation. Isn’t there a great common sense about the “goodness” of religion?
Probably you have different discussions in your society than we have. And if some publish statements as you cite them in your post – do you really fear that this could “affect” seriously the freedom of religious people?!?

There are extremists on “both” sides. Extremists that want to build theocra”z”y and others who consider religion as harmful or bad.
But I trust that in our free cultures no one of those extremists will win.
I consider it as very important to cultivate very seriously the tolerance that everybody can handle this as he wants to do it – everybody respecting the borders of the others.

I hadn’t heard of Sam Harris before, I just now read about him in Wikipedia.
Do you know this article?
As I understand it he is especially against extreme religiousness (and against moderate that is covering that extremism). I think (with all restrictions knowing only this Wikipedia-article) that he is recommending just a less irrational occupation with religion (e.g. not just believing all that e.g. religious leaders tell you) to avoid hate and intolerance spread under the disguise of religion. For me it doesn’t seem really a statement against religion in general more against intolerance and presumptuousness.
But I surely don’t know the details (and the articles by him in the big journals or his TV-appearances).

I think different opinions are valuable to revise my owns.

And I believe in the power of the good!
In freedom.

]]> By: Jamie Barrows http://www.theonlinerant.com/2007/10/22/is-freedom-of-religion-under-attack/comment-page-1/#comment-67 Jamie Barrows Thu, 08 Nov 2007 19:42:33 +0000 http://www.theonlinerant.com/2007/10/22/is-freedom-of-religion-under-attack/#comment-67 I don't think that there are any mainstream parties right now that advocate outlawing religion. I'm sure there are some fringe parties that would advocate it, but they are not taken seriously. Right now it would be politically stupid to admit that you were against religious freedom. Nevertheless, there are many political leaders in both of the two main parties that are very much anti religion. So if the political climate was to change, I could see many of them becoming more obvious in there attempts to attack religion. That's what I'm worried about. As for it being allowed, we are a free country. Anyone can say or believe anything they want. That's part of our freedom. And a political party that had an agenda to outlaw religious freedom is perfectly legal. I doubt that they will win many elections unless things change, but that doesn't mean that they can't have that stance. The USA is largely a secular(with Christian leanings) capitalist nation, but we have communist, fascist, libertarian, Muslim, Hindu, and Buddist parties. You name it, and we have a party for it. Those parties rarely win any elections, but all are allowed. Even when their platforms are not compatible with the nations laws. Freedom, even the freedom to be against freedom, is highly prized in our nation. I don’t think that there are any mainstream parties right now that advocate outlawing religion. I’m sure there are some fringe parties that would advocate it, but they are not taken seriously.

Right now it would be politically stupid to admit that you were against religious freedom. Nevertheless, there are many political leaders in both of the two main parties that are very much anti religion. So if the political climate was to change, I could see many of them becoming more obvious in there attempts to attack religion. That’s what I’m worried about.

As for it being allowed, we are a free country. Anyone can say or believe anything they want. That’s part of our freedom. And a political party that had an agenda to outlaw religious freedom is perfectly legal. I doubt that they will win many elections unless things change, but that doesn’t mean that they can’t have that stance.

The USA is largely a secular(with Christian leanings) capitalist nation, but we have communist, fascist, libertarian, Muslim, Hindu, and Buddist parties. You name it, and we have a party for it. Those parties rarely win any elections, but all are allowed. Even when their platforms are not compatible with the nations laws.
Freedom, even the freedom to be against freedom, is highly prized in our nation.

]]>