has religion become about hate?

[smileyeagle1021]

Something that has been bothering me for a while now, but why does religion now seem to be about hating the right people? In christianity it's about hating the gays and the muslims and the atheists, in islam it's about hating the infidels, and on and on. It seems like every religion has chosen to define themselves by who they hate now. I can't speak to anything outside of Christianity, but my mother taught me that Christ was about love, love thy neighbor and love thy Lord, but in Mormonism I was taught that I was supposed to hate homosexuals as defying God's will and trying to destroy america and morality, I was taught that I should hate those who questioned the church, should hate those who are different. So did I just have bad luck with my spiritual leaders or is this really what religion has come to? And if it has come to this, when did it happen, and is there anyway to fix it?

[Amethyst Hunter]

Possibly both. Some religions are more prone to hostility than others (you don't see Buddhism-based terrorism, for example - not that it couldn't exist, granted, but it's not likely to), and religion has become the big thing to sell nowadays because we are a culture of cheap fixes and quick gratification - look at the loads of "spiritual-based" crap in stores, the latest "purpose-driven" fad, the "WWJD" jewelry, the biggest box-office moneymaker in all history (The Passion, which is, as South Park so aptly put it, little more than a snuff film, except that in this case the snuff is violence instead of sex), megachurches, and so on.

So it follows that those in power in said religions - who are almost always behind the money! - want to consolidate that power and in turbulent times the best way to do that is to give the people a tangible enemy that plays upon their deepest fears. "Satan" for most people is an abstract concept that doesn't really register in the conscious mind. But apply that concept to any of the following: gay people, feminists, dark-skinned people, non-Christian people, doctors that specialize in abortion, women who have abortions, liberals, and so on...and you have a face to put on the concept that galvanizes people.

(To use a blatant example, the most common reason I've seen cited by gay people as to their fear of coming out is not of how God would treat them, but how the people in their lives would react. That's one hell - no pun intended - of a powerful deterrent.)

This is in fact one of the big reasons I rejected any and all organized religion and have pretty much been a lifelong agnostic - I'm sick of the ignorant hatred I'm seeing and I don't want to be a part of any club that requires I hate (and possibly harass/harm) someone for these abovementioned factors, or other related factors not mentioned here. Even if the majority of religious members are generally decent folk and don't endorse such views, I still don't want to associate myself, however inadvertently, with the scumbags that make their living warping said religion for sick purposes. If I'm going to hate somebody, it's because they're an asshole, plain and simple.

(Another thing that bothers me about this is that the genuinely good religious people out there aren't standing up to the bullies that have hijacked their beliefs and using them to spread harmful memes. Yes, some of them have spoken out and condemned the actions of those abusing religion, but I'd like to see more of that translated into action.)

As far as what can be done about this, I'm not sure; it's become so pervasive anymore and I often worry that the bullies are winning. Only if EVERYbody - secular and religious alike - stands up to them do we have a chance at restoring religions to what they were intended to be: a means to communicate with our maker, connect with other human beings and find our own paths in life.

Edit to add: As to when it happened, who knows - hate has been a component of religions ever since time began. But in this country, at least, it didn't become the *dominant* feature until fairly recently; much of the shit we're seeing now can be traced back to the early 1980s when dominionism really got off the ground (though from reports I've read, dominionism has been seeded as far back as the early 1900s!) and Reagan fueled the fire by pandering to some of this denomination. The economic boom and social issues-controversies of the 1990s helped power it, and by the 2000s it had mushroomed into a very serious threat (no thanks to certain scumbags whom I shall not bother to name here) that remains dangerous to this day. Part of the reason the hatebags have become so vocal and emboldened is due to the vast cultural changes and shifts in beliefs - such people find non-black-and-white thinking personally threatening, and they want to control society so strictly because they need it to control *them*. (Which is pretty disturbing if you think about things related to sex and violence, two areas that tend to garner the bulk of hostilities from the haters.)

[Wingates_Hellsing]

Why stop at religion? Just about everything has sprouted it's little sect of arbitrary hatred. Social groups, fandoms, political groups, everyone seems to migrate towards pointing the finger when the going get's 'rough'.

But it isn't even the finger pointing that's the problem, it's the arbitrary nature of said blaming. There are plenty of things out there very much at fault, but it seems most would rather spend time blaming whoever they'd like to get rid of than actually looking to solve the problem.

The whole situation is moronic. That's the best way to describe anyone who makes up their mind about something before they even know what it is. I guess it's just too much to ask for right now for people to actually know about the things they have opinions on.

I have opinions about gun control and media violence because I know about them. I don't have any opinion about fishing regulation because I don't know anything about fish. The only sensible options would be to either learn about fish so that I can form an opinion about what laws might help, or leave it up to people who do know fish.

That doesn't seem to happen anymore though, people don't admit that they don't know anything about people of Islamic faith, or liberal thought, and instead choose to paint them as the source of ultimate evil.

Hate is a great motivator. People will do crazy things because of hate, so it's no wonder that it's such a popular tool. The best thing we can do is motivate ourselves to take action in defiance of those who rely on scapegoating.

Hopefully understandable rant, over.

[Slytovhand]

Aaarghhhhh....

No no no and no!

Let's not tar 'religion' with the brush of the aresholes! (oooh... typo that works... Ares - God of War and hate!! well... bloodlust!)

Anyway.....

No.

Smiley, you've copped some bad crap in the names of a couple of religions.. let's not put them all into the same bag..(oooh - hang on, isn't that what some just suggested about tarring all Muslims the same way??)


Many religions are about peace, and not about hate. Some religions don't even care about the physical realms, so the point is completely irrelevant.

Buddhism has been mentioned... though, you don't see Buddhism-based terrorism, for example - not that it couldn't exist, granted, but it's not likely to is only because you haven't heard of it. Yes, it does exist... it's just that it's not directed towards any of us, but towards those who want to destroy their temples/statues...

Taoism.. again... "go inside" is a basic part of their philosophy.. not hate!

As for the beginnings of religion... no, not hate based... it was ignorance based. 'We don't know what's going on in the world around us, so maybe there's something up there that's directing all of this".... a way to explain the universe... Not hate based!

Sure, religion is a good hate based way of dealing with us... but the 2 do not equate.

To be blunt, Smiley, if that's what you're getting from your religion, change!


Wingate... yep, agree totally... too many people making loud opinions become a way of life... with absolutely no knowledge of what they're talking about. Even worse (when you think about it) is to condone an action or way to be based on the promulgation of that ignorance. It's one thing to hold an opinion based on ignorance - it's another to base a series of practice or attitude on it!

[BroomJockey]

*cough CRUSADES cough cough*

Religious-based hatred is nothing new.

Us vs. Them isn't new either. It all stems from the tribal societies of primitive man. Back then, when it was all stone tools and caves, it was all "Resources are limited, we must protect the village, those over there would do what they can to see us dead and take our resources for themselves, so we need to kill them first." And so they'd go and kill them first to ensure their own survival. Unfortunately, Us vs. Them remains hardwired in to our collective brains, so even today it remains an effective mind control technique which any group in the business of gaining power over people (organized religion, unstable governments, businesses looking for greater market share) exploits the fuck out of.

[guywithashovel]

I have done quite a bit of thinking about religion over the past several years, and this is one of the topics I've mulled over. To be perfectly honest, I don't think that, deep down, most religious people really HATE anyone. However, from being around more than a few people who were really religious, I have detected a sense of superiority within quite a few of them. Call it a God Complex if you want, but however you choose to label it, it's pretty obvious that they consider themselves superior to people who don't follow the path they follow.

In short, I don't think that most religious people---minus the extremists---really hate anyone who is gay, atheist, Wiccan, or anything else. But it's pretty obvious to me that many of them think they're vastly superior to such people. Though once again, I'm talking about the really devout ones, not the ones who don't see a need to wear their faith on their sleeve and liberally pepper their speech with scripture quotes and references to Jesus.

[PepperElf]

i know in some religions hatred is for pure evil and specific *acts* rather than people.

[bunnyboy]

Most religions aren't hate based, in fact the average religious person is less like Mr. Phelps and WBC, and more like a little Catholic monk in the 1200's who came from a small Italian town (for those who don't know I'm referring to St. Francis.)

As one Muslim leader of the day put it, if more Christians were like you, the world would be Christian.

But yeah I have to agree, it's the Phelps, and Robertsons and Bin Ladens, and their ilk who get the attention because they're not being quiet, meanwhile the (i'll just use the word here in a meaning I'll define after) Franciscans wont do anything until they have to go all Jesus with the money changers, righteous fury to get their faith back.

And by Franciscan I mean ANYONE who could be said to want St. Francis' prayer to be answerred.... google it, wonderful little piece, even my one athiest friend liked it, it's a wonderful little thing, actually made me go away from big giant churches towards small, multiple "ministry" churches, and ultimately something of a mysticism idea.

To paraphrase the 13th Apostle, ideas are flexible, beliefs are some of the worst things you can have.

BTW, Taoism as a religion is a bit different than Taoism as a philosophy.... kinda interesting how those eastern philosophy religions seem to have fewer dangerous extremists than our western belief religions, might be the whoole idea/belief thing has a point.

[Flyndaran]

Religion evolved to force an "us" mentality. The fact that that usually creates a "them" is simply human nature. Any innate unionizing force will create thems to hate. Geek vs. jocks for example.
I try really hard to see religion as a null sum game rather than simply a genetic delusion. But when loudmouths like Pat Robertson continues to get huge funds from his TV hate show, it gets a bit more difficult.

[Rapscallion]

Religion evolved to force an "us" mentality. The fact that that usually creates a "them" is simply human nature. Any innate unionizing force will create thems to hate. Geek vs. jocks for example.
I try really hard to see religion as a null sum game rather than simply a genetic delusion. But when loudmouths like Pat Robertson continues to get huge funds from his TV hate show, it gets a bit more difficult.

I would rather suggest that religion - as a tool for control - uses the tribal mentality common in humans.

Rapscallion

[Flyndaran]

I would rather suggest that religion - as a tool for control - uses the tribal mentality common in humans.

Rapscallion

With religion being as nigh universal as it is, it must be needed on a more direct basis than simply hijacking another urge, at least in my opinion.
Look at how children instinctively try to explain the universe in magical usually animistic ways even after being told the mundane truths.
I see this whole oddity from the further outside possible. I never once believed in the supernatural even as a small child.

[Flyndaran]

I would rather suggest that religion - as a tool for control - uses the tribal mentality common in humans.

Rapscallion

I thought I responded already, weird. My mistake.

I think in some ways religion is more a base human nature than a tool. But that's just semantic quibbling.

I do long for a time when my people are the majority, and religion is relegated to ancient history.
I don't think many things would change. Religion is used as an excuse to do what people were already going to do anyway.

[protege]

Religion, by itself isn't the problem. Rather, it has been perverted for various groups to "justify" their actions. How many terrorists have blown up planes or flown them into buildings...and claimed that they did it for Allah? Or, what about the Crusaders who went into Jerusalem because it was "God's Will?" In both cases, religion provided those fools with a convenient excuse to not only cover their actions, but possibly get new members as well.

I agree that many Western religious groups have a very small, but very vocal (and annoying) minority. Everyone knows these people are nuts, yet nobody chooses to do anything--they're hoping that those nuts simply go away. That's not what usually happens though. These nuts *crave* the attention and will do anything to get it. Unfortunate, but true.

[Slytovhand]

So... what do you propose to do with the 'nuts'? That's the real problem!

Flyn - you did.... and then came back 9 hours later... maybe you went to a first post you hadn't read? I've done that!

[Tanasi]

I was taught to love the sinner and hate the sin. Just because you can do something sinful doesn't mean you have to commit the sin afterall most sins are committed for convienence sake or pleasure.
IMO it's not a sin to drink alcholic beverages but it is a sin to become intoxicated. It's not a sin to be homosexual, but committing homosexual acts is sinful afterall the Lord smote a whole bunch of folks for that very thing. Now before you start trashing me regarding homosexuals I personally have nothing against you all, what you are doing is between you and the Lord and it's not my business and I don't want to know your business.

I try real hard to live by the Golden Rule: "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."
To answer the question in some instanances some folks do twist their religion and use it as a weapon of hate, but I think those that do are in the minority at least amoungst the folks I associate with.

[protege]

So... what do you propose to do with the 'nuts'? That's the real problem!

I hear Siberia is nice this time of year... :D Seriously though, I don't think we'll ever get rid of them.

[Flyndaran]

I was taught to love the sinner and hate the sin. ...

I try real hard to live by the Golden Rule: "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."
To answer the question in some instanances some folks do twist their religion and use it as a weapon of hate, but I think those that do are in the minority at least amoungst the folks I associate with.

I hope you don't offended when I say that whole thing is absurd and ridiculous.
It's like saying that you don't hate me because I'm male, you just hate it when I do anything masculine.
You don't hate fish, only those that breathe through their gills.
If you hate defining actions, then you hate those that can't be anything else. Trying to weasel out of it makes "you" look hateful AND devious.

I always thought as religion as more about who you can hate than who you can love. As an atheist, I believe nearly everyone is deserving of respect and understanding. As an X religious person, you get to hate all sorts of people.

[Boozy]

I hope you don't offended when I say that whole thing is absurd and ridiculous.

So you don't understand the concept of loving someone even if you hate something they do?

[Fashion Lad!]

Some religions teach us to hate the sin and not the sinner. But a lot of people have a hard time disguising between the two.

Most religions do teach us to love one another, but I don't know if accept is part of that. You can love someone but not like them. That's what my mom says about my brother. :rolleyes:

Mostly though, I think people use religion as an excuse for hate when they do hate. I've not seen a religion teach anyone to hate, but I haven't studied them all.

[Wingates_Hellsing]

So you don't understand the concept of loving someone even if you hate something they do?

At least not when that 'something they do' is an integral and inherent part of them as a person. We aren't talking "I love jimmy but he belches sometimes" we're talking "I love Jimmy but his name starts with J and he has a penis"

And after a certain point, when *some* religious people go all preachy 'save you from your evil ways' they just come off as arrogant jerks with good intentions. Good intentions ruined by disgusting methodology and nosiness...

Don't get me wrong, I have the utmost respect for those who can practice their beliefs without foisting them on one another. It's just that some seem to think that their beliefs are some sort of mandate to stop everyone from doing things some dick with a funny hat doesn't like.

[Boozy]

For the record, I don't agree with the "Love the sinner, hate the sin" approach to homosexuality, since I don't believe that homosexuality is a sin.

But I did want to challenge Flyn when he said the notion was "absurd and ridiculous". If one truly believes that homosexuality is a sin, then I don't see anything illogical about it.

Flyn also jumps to the conclusion that homosexuality is the defining part of a homosexual person. That's not true. I'm not defined by my heterosexuality. I am also other things; I am a whole person, defined by the totality of my characteristics.

To many Christians, the only defining characteristic of a person is their soul, and they do not acknowledge that a soul can be homosexual. Only bodies can be straight or gay. Therefore, for anyone who agrees with that premise, it is not illogical to "love the sinner and hate the sin".

[radiocerk]

But if (insert deity here) decided tomorrow that heterosexuality was a sin, and all the homosexuals are going to heaven, could you just decide to be attracted to people of the same gender? If religions want to believe that you can just decide to be straight (for most religions), non-dependent on psych meds (for Scientologists), not inclined to eat bacon (for Jews) *all right, I'm stretching on that one* can you just "decide" to be able to follow the tenets of that religion. Or are some people born homosexual, are some people suffering a chemical imbalance that needs medication to function, can some people just not live without their bacon, sausage, and ham?

[IDrinkaRum]

And that's the beauty of free will: You can choose if you want to stay with the religion you're with or explore new and different avenues for you to express religion (or you can even start your own religion like the Jews, the Christians, L. Ron Hubbard, etc.).

[RootedPhoenix]

But if (insert deity here) decided tomorrow that heterosexuality was a sin, and all the homosexuals are going to heaven, could you just decide to be attracted to people of the same gender?

No. I would choose what I did, though. I don't just go out and have sex with any guy I'm attracted to. I still make choices, even though I might want to chase those guys a lot more than I let on.

I've chosen not to have sex at all; some other people choose only certain people to have sex with.

If I'm going to hell for my attraction to guys with this different system, then I'm going to hell. My attraction to guys isn't any more of a switch than anyone else's is.

So you don't understand the concept of loving someone even if you hate something they do?

I have homosexual friends, and have for a long time. They don't always like what I do, and I don't always like what they do. These are the very same people I take my problems to, because we've all done our best to love each other and find our common ground.


Flyn also jumps to the conclusion that homosexuality is the defining part of a homosexual person. That's not true. I'm not defined by my heterosexuality. I am also other things; I am a whole person, defined by the totality of my characteristics.


I agree, Boozy. I am a musician, a heterosexual female, and LDS. Are any one of those things the only thing to define me?

I always thought I was a human being first, and so was everybody else. It doesn't matter who does what and where to whom. We all have inherent value simply for existing.

I think that if anyone is using any religion to justify hateful acts, he or she has got it horribly wrong.

[BroomJockey]

I agree, Boozy. I am a musician, a heterosexual female, and LDS. Are any one of those things the only thing to define me?

I always thought I was a human being first, and so was everybody else. It doesn't matter who does what and where to whom. We all have inherent value simply for existing.

No, not any one of those things defines you, but how much can we take away and still have you be you? If we took out the part of you that's LDS, and informed by your LDS, are you still you? What if we took out the part of you that's musical? What if we turned you in to a guy? You're still a person, and still have value, but you're not YOU any more. It's like people who get in to relationships for what the other person could be, not what they are. And those generally don't go well.

(General speaking now) Your orientation doesn't define you, but it's a part of you, and every part of you influences the other parts of you, and while you can hate the actions of someone, homosexuality isn't an action, it's a characteristic. And if you hate homosexuality, I'm sorry to tell you, you hate the person who's homosexual. If you only hate same-sex intercourse, fine, that's an action. But it's constantly homosexuality that is condemned. The characteristic of being attracted to the same gender. That's not an action. And as far as I'm concerned, you can't hate part of a person, but accept the whole rest of the person. It's too conflicted, since there's no way to know how the part you hate is informing the rest of the person's being.

[RootedPhoenix]

But it's constantly homosexuality that is condemned. The characteristic of being attracted to the same gender. That's not an action. And as far as I'm concerned, you can't hate part of a person, but accept the whole rest of the person. It's too conflicted, since there's no way to know how the part you hate is informing the rest of the person's being.

Now that you say that, I see that that's what Ive been doing. (Making that distinction, that is) Specific actions are what I don't like, but being homosexual isn't a choice.

Thanks for the vocabulary to say what I hadn't figured out how to articulate. :)

[smileyeagle1021]

No, not any one of those things defines you, but how much can we take away and still have you be you? If we took out the part of you that's LDS, and informed by your LDS, are you still you? What if we took out the part of you that's musical? What if we turned you in to a guy? You're still a person, and still have value, but you're not YOU any more. It's like people who get in to relationships for what the other person could be, not what they are. And those generally don't go well.


Thank you Broom... reminds me of a discussion I had with a coworker... he asked why a value of a person was now being determined by what they do in the bedroom... surely a homosexual has more to define themselves by... and I point blank told him "I view myself as gay in the same way you view yourself as LDS... neither defines us, but take either away from us and we are fundamentally changed... the idea that you can judge my person without including the fact that I'm gay is just as flawed a prospect as saying I could judge you person without including the fact that you are LDS."

[Gravekeeper]

I think I'm still the only Buddhist around, so, er, Buddha Protip Time(tm)

Buddhism has the simplest little rule that I always keep in mind:

Is what you're saying or doing causing suffering without benefit? Yes? Than it is immoral.

End of story.

No one is exempt and no is any more or any less deserving of the consideration. There is no Big List Of Rules you will be sent to eternal Hell for.

The stupidest part about all this is Jesus's original teachings are similar to Buddha's. They also both used similar styles of teaching. To the point where there's some speculation Jesus actually encountered Buddhist monks at some point. Which is very possible as they were in some of the same city's.

Yet Jesus's original teachings have been so twisted and adapted for personal gain over the centuries that its all messed up now in modern Christianity to be honest.

The reason you don't see militant Buddhism is because it is not a violent philosophy ( Though none technically of them should be if people actually practiced what they preached ) and it is not exactly a missionary philosophy. That's the flaw right there. A lot of the big religions grew up not only with the Us vs Them attitude but also with the We'll MAKE You Us Whether You Like It Or Not.

Its this "If you don't believe what I do my god will fist you with a coat rack in the afterlife" attitude that's kind of the problem.

MY GOD CAN TOTALLY BEAT UP YOUR GOD. ;p

[Amethyst Hunter]

"If you don't believe what I do my god will fist you with a coat rack in the afterlife"

:D :D (where's the laughing icon when you need it!?) :D

I was going to say I've always thought of it as a matter of "My god's dick is bigger than your god's dick" (since so many religions are patriarchal-based and full of misogyny), but this works well too. XD

[HYHYBT]

To use a blatant example, the most common reason I've seen cited by gay people as to their fear of coming out is not of how God would treat them, but how the people in their lives would react.Well yeah, God knows everything already so what's the point in hoping *he* won't find out?

afterall the Lord smote a whole bunch of folks for that very thing.I'd be very interested in hearing about this: the closest I've ever found was the destruction of a city where they tried to gang-rape angels, which obviously is completely different than consensual sex between people who have promised their lives to each other.

More to the topic: I fell out of the habit of going to church more than ten years ago because of scheduling: getting off work at 1AM or later Saturday night wasn't conducive to getting up Sunday morning. Lately I've been missing it and wanting to find one, and, though there's practically a church every 100 yards around here, there are none within 20 miles that wouldn't turn on me were I to momentarily not hide my beliefs, especially about who they think "true" Christians have to hate. And really, what's the point of going to church if, while there, you have to be dishonest about what you believe?

[smileyeagle1021]

Well yeah, God knows everything already so what's the point in hoping *he* won't find out?

I'd be very interested in hearing about this: the closest I've ever found was the destruction of a city where they tried to gang-rape angels, which obviously is completely different than consensual sex between people who have promised their lives to each other.


not only that, but traditionally angels have been viewed to be genderless... how can we judge the assailant's sexuality when they attacked being without gender?

[MergedLoki]

Religion as a whole... NO (i'm not religious in the slightest and am 110% against MOST religious and ANY organized religion)

but... that doesn't mean 'oh im a catholic fuck you jews' is the instant thought to ANY cahtolic etc.

I think i'ts just hate filled people using ANY tool or excuse they can think of to justify THEIR hate to themselves and to justify it to like minded individuals.

I've got friends in tons of differnt religions (prodestant, catholic, wicca, pagan, etc. etc.) and none of them are crazy extreme to the point they alienate anyone else or get pissy with anyone for not sharing their views etc.

Hell my prodestant friend (him and me have had many a drunken argument about religion) has said to me 'Loki i'll tell you the kind of christian I am... the kind that fully aceepts that Jesus is a zombie" (he's come back from the dead and wants your soul:D)

[Racket_Man]

I think i'ts just hate filled people using ANY tool or excuse they can think of to justify THEIR hate to themselves and to justify it to like minded individuals.

:D)

here is the crutial statement of the WHOLE discussion. God may or may nothave created religion (there is the DISTINCT possiblity that HUMANs created religion for whatever reason ie ignorance about the working of the physical world around them).

most human religions preach love tolerance,etc. but as human history show time and time again we twist and pervert those original teachings so far out of line it is sickening.

one large example is when the white Europeans came to the Americas, they marveled at the "spirituallity" of the native peoples. they stood in awe that the natives were more spiritual than they were. some of the Euro[pean went off to live with the natives to study their culture and NEVER wanted to come back to "civilization".

but wait the Europeans wanted LAND and RICHES and possibly SLAVES. OK now they called them "savages" and "beasts" and "sinners" and Pagans and Ifeidels so they could do what they wanted ie. trick the natives, outright steal from them, treat them anyway they wanted, kill them, butilize them for fun, destroy any "non-Christian blasphonmous or heritical" culture. Literally view the natives as not human or sub human (another theme thoughout history)

I have no problem with religion or spirituallity. it is just the people who twist and pervert the message to their own means to an end.

[Flyndaran]

...
most human religions preach love tolerance,etc. but as human history show time and time again we twist and pervert those original teachings so far out of line it is sickening.

...I have no problem with religion or spirituallity. it is just the people who twist and pervert the message to their own means to an end.

I do have a problem with group delusions. Most religions have partly a tolerance message, but it is drowned out by all the exceptions on who you get to hate and kill. Trying to separate them is a fool's errand. No religion only has peace. They all have hate and willful ignorance of science and reality.
I hope for a day, when humanity outgrows this genetic mental illness. We may actually get a culture of love and acceptance, but it won't have anything to do with "spirituality".

[Ree]

Something that has been bothering me for a while now, but why does religion now seem to be about hating the right people? In christianity it's about hating the gays and the muslims and the atheists, I was born and raised Christian, and I don't ever recall being told to hate anyone.

It's true that in my church, certain things are considered sinful, such as homosexuality and atheism, but the teaching that I was given has always been to love the person in spite of the "sin".

My own personal feelings conflict quite a bit with my teachings when it comes to homosexuality.

Having a nephew who is gay, and having watched him grow up, I know that he has not chosen to be gay, and I have a hard time considering him a "sinner".

He is one of the most socially aware and kindhearted people I know.

[RecoveringKinkoid]

Same here about the "hate" part. I have never been told to hate anyone or any group.

In fact, I've been told that to hate another person is wrong and something to be struggled with. It's human, yes, but not Christian.

Don't confuse a religion with the flawed beings that try (and sometimes fail) to follow it.

As for the gay part, it's never come up in the context of my own religious life, actually. I was in a Baptist church as a child because my cousins down here in SC went to Baptist churches. My own parents did not attend church. There wasn't much talk about homosexuality when I was a child in church. At least, not to me. When I became old enough that I realized that different denominations have different teachings, I was old enough to switch churches, and switch I did. To a particularly liberal Episcopalean one where homosexuality is not an issue.

So I've never even been taught that it's wrong in a religious context. And, like Ree, I know that homosexuals do not choose to be gay any more than I choose to be straight. They are God's beloved, just as anyone else is.

And also, like Ree, I have a friend in the SCA that is the most Christ-like person I have ever met in my life. And he is gay (and mostly naked most of the time). If you were to run in the same circles I run in, hundreds of people would say the same. The man shines with a rare light.

[kiwi]

And that's the beauty of free will.

The vast majority of religions are salvation based, nirvana or heaven or whatever you want to call it, the doctrine states that if you live a certain way you will receive a happy after life.
If you choose to break those rules you will have a bad after life in hell or outer darkness or be reincarnated as a roach.

When the major break in Christianity occurred (and Im using Christianity as an example because thats what I was raised with), there were a few major differences in the doctrine that caused the breakaway, predestination being one of them. Catholics believed in free will (if you follow these rules and obey/believe you will go to heaven) and Protestants believed in predestination (god has already decided your fate). Even in the christian religion there are different beliefs about what predestination means. Calvinists literally believe that God has already decided your fate, Lutherans believe that only Christians are predestined for heaven.

So for some people there is no such thing as free will, the laws of the church state it does not exsist. "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them." Bolding mine.

I don't believe religions overtly teach people to hate, but they do prey upon a humans natural instinct to shun the "other". If you believe something different to me so therefore one of us is wrong and that better not be me! If they teach that one way is correct and the only way to salvation, then all other ways must be wrong. That's why so many religions call themselves the one true church or the offer the one true way to God.

Thankfully some religions teach tolerance towards other religions but not all do. Even if they teach moral superiority I would hope that most churches are moderate and tolerant in their teachings.
Fundamentalist christian churches shouldn't be held up as an archetype of Christianity anymore than Islamic terrorists should be held up as an archetype of your average follower of Islam.

[Flyndaran]

...
Thankfully some religions teach tolerance towards other religions but not all do. Even if they teach moral superiority I would hope that most churches are moderate and tolerant in their teachings.
Fundamentalist christian churches shouldn't be held up as an archetype of Christianity anymore than Islamic terrorists should be held up as an archetype of your average follower of Islam.

The minority religions have to espouse tolerance otherwise the biggies would smash them in a nanosecond.
People are people. They need to feel holier than thou in a literal sense. Individuals may actually be good, but groups of people and so religions will never be anything but destructive forces of nature.
I am a good person. I didn't need religion to be kind to others why do "you"? If you don't, then there really is no point to it.

[Ree]

I am a good person. I didn't need religion to be kind to others why do "you"? If you don't, then there really is no point to it.Ummmm....I don't know about you, but that's not at all what I get out of my religion.
I can be kind and good whether I belong to a religion or not, but that's not the point of it at all for me.
There's a sense of community in my church. It's very far from exclusion of others.
To those who choose not to follow an organized religion, however, it may seem that way.

I can worship God sitting in my chair at home, but in attending a religious service, I am taking my prayers and concerns and offering them up, knowing that everyone else is there doing the same. In that way, there is an entire community offering up prayers for me, and I, in turn am offering up my prayers for them.

So, instead of sitting alone, focusing on my own pain and feeling helpless, I am then turning my thoughts outward to others while also gaining some hope for myself.

[Flyndaran]

Ummmm....I don't know about you, but that's not at all what I get out of my religion.
...
I can worship God sitting in my chair at home, but in attending a religious service, I am taking my prayers and concerns and offering them up, knowing that everyone else is there doing the same. In that way, there is an entire community offering up prayers for me, and I, in turn am offering up my prayers for them.

So, instead of sitting alone, focusing on my own pain and feeling helpless, I am then turning my thoughts outward to others while also gaining some hope for myself.

So you need religion to feel part of a group? My girlfriend gets that by playing D&D.

[Ree]

So you need religion to feel part of a group? My girlfriend gets that by playing D&D.Way to twist things to try to make your point and attempt to belittle my own beliefs because you don't get it.

I'm sorry you don't understand it.

I don't need my religion to feel part of a group. That's just one of the nice things about belonging to an organized religion.
There is a sense of community, but I certainly don't need to belong to a religion to experience that.

I have my family, the service club I belong to, my circle of friends, and many other things to give me a feeling of community.
I would imagine an insular, fairly antisocial type person would have difficulty understanding that aspect.

I don't need it to feel I belong. It's just nice to know I have that, though.

[Flyndaran]

Way to twist things to try to make your point and attempt to belittle my own beliefs because you don't get it.

I'm sorry you don't understand it.
...
I don't need it to feel I belong. It's just nice to know I have that, though.

Then that means you didn't answer my question, but deflected it.
What do you need from religion?
And what's wrong with D&D?

[Ree]

Then that means you didn't answer my question, but deflected it.
What do you need from religion?
And what's wrong with D&D?Why do you feel the need to belittle religion? I know you don't understand it, and for some people it's easier to mock and ridicule than to try and understand.

What's really so wrong with the community aspect of organized religion?

Why should it be better for a person to forgo religion and join a D&D group?

I don't understand why that bothers you so much.

I have a belief in a loving God who listens to my prayers and answers them, even if they aren't answered in the way that I would want. I believe in a God who has a plan for my life even if I don't understand that plan.
It is my belief in God that got me through a pretty crappy childhood.
It was my faith in God that helped me through some serious situations in my personal life.

It was my belief in God that brought me through the past year or more and kept me going after losing my husband very suddenly.

His funeral was held in the little country church that has always been a large focus of my life. I was surrounded by people with whom I have spent a large part of my life sitting in those same pews, offering up our prayers together and receiving Christ through the sacrament of Communion together.
The service was scripture filled and very spiritual.
I made sure of that.
Planning that service gave me a sense of comfort. Through my grief, I read through many different scripture passages to find the perfect ones to give me a feeling of hope that I was not alone, that this was part of His plan, and that my husband was now free from earthly pain and was with God.

I heard from someone who attended the funeral with a group of her coworkers. They were acquaintances related to the foster care that I do. I don't even know what their own personal beliefs are, or whether they follow my religion, or any religion for that matter. I do know they told this person, "I have been to a lot of funerals, but that had to have been one of the most comforting and beautiful funeral services I have ever attended."

My belief that there is a God watching over me keeps me going and gets me through the hard stuff.

For me to feel that my husband had simply ceased to exist at all, and there was no afterlife or God to keep him would have been devastating.

If it bothers you that my belief in what you see as an imaginary being kept me sane, then that would be your own issues. I am certainly comfortable with the fact and really don't feel I have to apologize for that.

[smileyeagle1021]

Well Ree (and Flyn), if it says anything about the church, my mother no longer considers herself Methodist. She still follows Christ but she refuses to affiliate with a church. This came about after discovering the Methodist Church (Open Hearts, Open Minds, Open Doors... yeah, bullshit), turned me away in Salt Lake (which she was willing to write off as one bad apple) and then later the involvement of Methodist churches in Maine participating in Yes on 1.
A year ago my mother would refuse to accept that a church could be hateful... now she refuses to affiliate with them because of the hatred shared by mainstream christianity in the United States (or at least Maine, California, Nevada, and Utah).
That said, she, like I, still have and never will lose faith in the Almighty. Membership in a religion is no indication of a person's faith in God, though it may be an indicator of what type of person they are (very few people who are active in the Mormon church are accepting of gays, as one example).

[Ree]

A year ago my mother would refuse to accept that a church could be hateful... now she refuses to affiliate with them because of the hatred shared by mainstream christianity in the United States (or at least Maine, California, Nevada, and Utah).I can certainly understand that this has been your experience, and I'm so sorry for that.

I guess I have been fortunate that I have not seen that in my own church.

[Arcade Man D]

Well Ree (and Flyn), if it says anything about the church, my mother no longer considers herself Methodist. She still follows Christ but she refuses to affiliate with a church. This came about after discovering the Methodist Church (Open Hearts, Open Minds, Open Doors... yeah, bullshit), turned me away in Salt Lake (which she was willing to write off as one bad apple) and then later the involvement of Methodist churches in Maine participating in Yes on 1.
A year ago my mother would refuse to accept that a church could be hateful... now she refuses to affiliate with them because of the hatred shared by mainstream christianity in the United States (or at least Maine, California, Nevada, and Utah).
That said, she, like I, still have and never will lose faith in the Almighty. Membership in a religion is no indication of a person's faith in God, though it may be an indicator of what type of person they are (very few people who are active in the Mormon church are accepting of gays, as one example).

Suggest the Episcopal or Evangelical Lutheran churches to your mother (if she still wants to join an organized church). Both of them have adopted official stances that state explicitly that homosexuality is not a sin, and will even perform same-sex marriages.

[RecoveringKinkoid]

So you need religion to feel part of a group? My girlfriend gets that by playing D&D.

So, your girlfriend needs D&D to feel part of a group?

C'mon, saying this in regards to Ree's post is grasping at farts. :rolleyes:

[BroomJockey]

What's really so wrong with the community aspect of organized religion?


It's the same thing that's wrong with any community that has specific ideological requirements to join. Everyone's beliefs reinforce each other's. If everyone starts out open-minded and caring, you'll likely stay that way. The community does nothing to aid that. If a close-minded person joins a community like that, they may change, though they're more likely to leave and find a different community that is more closely aligned with their beliefs.

If you start out with a group of close-minded people, they'll feed off each other and only become more stony. And if an open-minded person joined, they may leave, or they may start to absorb the views of the community through continual reinforcement of the "norm." Especially if there are not other groups available. The open-minded person is at greater risk because they're willing to give the close-minded the benefit of the doubt. The guise of religion does absolutely nothing to alleviate this, and actually can be more damaging, since many religious people are of the opinion "any church is better than no church." This forces them in to continual contact with people who have damaging beliefs.

So, the propensity to damage open-mindedness through indoctrination is what's wrong with the community aspect of organized religion.

[RecoveringKinkoid]

Any community of people are to some extent, of like mind. I can't think of one that isn't.

Manufactured ones, like religion, clubs, or what have you are of like mind.

Naturally occuring ones, like circles of friends, families, and social scenes are also.

You may not agree with EVERYTHING everyone in your group believes, but you are close enough to the common thought that you end up part of the group.

[Ree]

So, the propensity to damage open-mindedness through indoctrination is what's wrong with the community aspect of organized religion.I'm sorry that's been your experience.
My comments are based off of my own experiences, and, as I said, that hasn't been my personal experience.

[guywithashovel]

I try not to think about religion as being about hate. I did have some bad tastes of it while growing up, and religion did cause me to make some decisions that I am now regretting just a little. Many of the people I was in church with as a kid seemed to have this attitude that they were above everyone else because of their religious practices. But I try to focus on the things about religion that sometimes interest me, like the philosophical aspect and the focus on the mysteries of life. I know that not all religious organizations and people are like what I have experienced.

[RecoveringKinkoid]

But again, your experience is based on the people who are failing to live by their own professed creed. That is not the religion's fault.

I suppose there are people out there saying "the Baptist christians are bad because of how hateful the Westboro church is (they are the very misguided idiots picketing funerals). Well, the Westboro idiots are not practicing any form of Christianity. They are operating their own cult while claiming to be Christian, and performing profoundly unChristlike actions while doing it.

I could also claim to be a Tibetian monk, but that would not make it true that I was one.

[BroomJockey]

But again, your experience is based on the people who are failing to live by their own professed creed. That is not the religion's fault.

No, but if you only ever meet people who fail at the religion, then it really doesn't matter how good the religion is. After all, it's only as good as the people following it. Same for most ideas.

After all, national pride is a wonderful thing.

Then next thing, people are goose-stepping into the Rhineland.

/Godwin

[Slytovhand]

Actually BJ, the analogy is fair.

The only real difference between a religion and what happened during the dark ages of Nazi Germany (implying that there was actually some good aspects of it), was the direction specifically taken, and the specific reasons behind what happened.

Religion has been one of the biggest promoters of war amongst humanity for thousands of years. The threats perceived by the Germans during the 20's and 30's were very little different.... 'our way of being has been attacked - we must defend ourselves, let's rally under this person whom we see as having our best interests at heart'.

So, in what BJ is saying, it's not so much the 'organisation' that is the problem, it's that people often sacrifice their own personal identity - including their own ideals, ethics and even braincells - for the sake of that organisation. It's when people stop thinking for themselves, even if they agree with the majority of the organisation in general, that organisations start to fail.

[RecoveringKinkoid]

It's when people stop thinking for themselves, even if they agree with the majority of the organisation in general, that organisations start to fail.

Well, I can't argue with this. It's true.

[Flyndaran]

Individual humans can be nice. Groups of humans are the most diabolical forces for destruction and suffering that ever existed.

One man believing in a dude in the sky can be nice. Get a bunch of them together, then they outlaw sex ed.

[RecoveringKinkoid]

Crowds suck, people rock. ;)

[Flyndaran]

Crowds suck, people rock. ;)

Crowds always suck, while people or persons CAN rock. They certainly don't do it automatically.

[Anthony K. S.]

"People are smart. They can handle it."
"A person can be smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals, and you know it."

- Men In Black

[Adoyle90815]

The way I see it, there are some people who pick the most hateful parts of the Bible, Koran, or some other religious text and use those parts to justify their hatred of those who aren't like them. There are also those who are religious, yet they actually practice what their religion actually teaches, which is showing unconditional love or promoting peace.

[Flyndaran]

The way I see it, there are some people who pick the most hateful parts of the Bible, Koran, or some other religious text and use those parts to justify their hatred of those who aren't like them. There are also those who are religious, yet they actually practice what their religion actually teaches, which is showing unconditional love or promoting peace.

I don't believe that most religions do teach love and promote peace.
I judge them by what their followers do, not by what they may say.

[Skunkle]

You're welcome to do so, Flyndaran, but I know what my Faith is like and I really don't care how anyone else chooses to do it, alone or in groups. Yes, groups tend to be bad. But not ALL groups are by nature bad. Yes, individuals do tend to be better than groups, but there are plenty of individuals with whom I don't want to deal at all.

My Faith in God says that what another person is doing is not my concern. Not only is it not my place to tell them they are sinning, it is not my place to really believe they are sinning. The only sins I must consider, ever, are my own, and I have my share. I am no more valuable as a person for having Faith nor less valuable because of my sins than any other person. And yes, to me, God is about liove. Religion and many churches have been corrupted.

Smileyeagle, I read that some recent happening has really put you against Christians. It must have been bad, and I'm not going to try to tell you to alter your feelings on them. But please, no one here, decide that God is about hatred and exclusion simply because His followers have chosen of their own free will to be such.

I will, however, state again my offer that, should you ever find yourself in Seattle, you contact me and visit a church here. I can say nothing of what 99.999% of the attendees are like outside the church, in their real lives. But I CAN say that the paster there preaches love and acceptance, and that his messages contain zero "love the sinner and hate the sin". Following said philosophy seems to me to be an easy out, a way to keep hating people while pretending not to. "I hate what you do, and as you live that way, in essence I hate who you are, but I'll pray every day that you don't burn in hell for eternity". If one looks at the Bible, it doesn't even MENTION hell, really. That's just a poiwer trip, saying I'm better than you, but if you work really hard and change the things God (read: I and my people) don't approve of, maybe you, too, can be like me. That's bull.

When describing the church I like, that is Episcopal, I don't mean all of the churches under that name. I like this church, this pastor, and the people I have met there, and there I am accepted as a child of God who is not sinning through homosexuality but is naturally that way and is loved by God. And again... Many of my feelings on faith are carried quite nicely by the song "I Saw God" by Victor Wooten.

...I don't want to be like those people. Jesus DID preach messages of love and brotherhood, really. And MY Faith is NEVER about hate. I refuse to hate anyone. For one, I believe I sin by hating. For two, what point does hatred have? What GOOD point does hatred have?