Will we ever be independent from religion?

[John Smith]

That's the independence this American citizen would like to celebrate.

A truly religious person must, be definition, put his religion/God first, and he can't do that and follow our constitution if he sees them in conflict.

That person has a built in conflict of interests.

[Peerie Maa]

We are never going to get rid of religion.
So you need robust ways to enforce the separation and keep religion out of all levels of public service.

[John Smith]

We are never going to get rid of religion.
So you need robust ways to enforce the separation and keep religion out of all levels of public service.

Hard to do when the people who get to make the decisions are religiously inclined, or driven.

[Rich Jones]

My faith and my allegiance to the U.S. Constitution live a very peaceful coexistence.
If I were to have lived in Nazi Germany, that would not be the case.
I bid you all a peaceful day.

[Peerie Maa]

Hard to do when the people who get to make the decisions are religiously inclined, or driven.

It is like all things in politics. The citizens have to make informed decisions and lobby for the changes that they want.

[skuthorp]

Belief in a higher power a great unifier, religion an equally great divider.
As a total unbeliever myself I acknowledge the role of formal belief systems in the evolution of man and his mind to be what you see today. But the continued fracturing over the past writings of men, now raised to the absurd status of the word of various unauthorised franchises of the god business may undo all the previous advances. I'll be interested to see how religion manages as climate change begins to take it's toll.
(If I live long enough that is)

[StevenBauer]

Sadly, no.

3298651A-EB5B-4985-ABF4-0459C44FC819.jpg

[George.]

We are never going to get rid of religion.

I agree. Like you said elsewhere, it is probably innate in a lot of people.

My hope is that religion will become ever more fragmented and toothless. It is the big organized religions, nationwide or worldwide, that are evil.

[Gerarddm]

Jesus, I hope so.

[Rich Jones]

Quote from #6: I'll be interested to see how religion manages as climate change begins to take its toll.

We'll build another ark!!

[CWSmith]

John, people of religious faith are simply voting their values just like you. If you don't like it, change their minds.

[Reynard38]

I’ve been independent from religion since I was 17.
Religion is just a way to make $$ from faith. Nothing more than a business, and a damn lucrative one at that.

[Rich Jones]

John, people of religious faith are simply voting their values just like you. If you don't like it, change their minds.

I believe he's trying, but like everything on this forum, people have their views and are not about to change, including those who like epoxy and those who think epoxy sucks!

[Rich Jones]

I’ve been independent from religion since I was 17.
Religion is just a way to make $$ from faith. Nothing more than a business, and a damn lucrative one at that.

I'd like you to sit in on a budget meeting at my church as we try to make ends meet. Most people wouldn't get out of bed for the money we pay our staff and clergy, yet they are working for a higher purpose then money.
Believe me, it is not a business and is anything but lucrative.

It could be that you are basing your opinion on a handful of mega-church leaders who do indeed become filthy rich off the back of their parishioners who can't really afford it.

[ron ll]

As long as I can remember, I’ve had two wishes for things I hope to see before I die; evidence of extra terrestrial life, and evidence of the death of religion. I may get one.

[George.]

John, people of religious faith are simply voting their values just like you.

Some do. Those are harmless. The problem is the huge moronic mass of them who are simply voting as they are told. You know, like the ones who vote for Trump or Bolsonaro because of their Christian values.

[ron ll]

Voting based on faith is not a decision. It is adherence to a bias.

[CWSmith]

Some do. Those are harmless. The problem is the huge moronic mass of them who are simply voting as they are told. You know, like the ones who vote for Trump or Bolsonaro because of their Christian values.

Fair enough. Uninformed voters are dangerous to democracy, but from my point of view they are better defined as viewers of Fox News than people of faith. Granted, there is some overlap, but not as much as some might think. "Uninformed" is the more correct description.

[JimD]

Religion ticks so many boxes as a source of comfort, community, organization and power. As long as humans run the gamut between gullible idiots and cunning manipulators we will have religion.

[Peerie Maa]

Fair enough. Uninformed voters are dangerous to democracy, but from my point of view they are better defined as viewers of Fox News than people of faith. Granted, there is some overlap, but not as much as some might think. "Uninformed" is the more correct description.

Before Faux News there was Readers Digest.
Back in the '60s this was going the rounds:
"When does WASP feel uninformed?
When his Readers Digest Mag is late in the post.
When is a WASP misinformed?
When he has read his Readers Digest."

[Osborne Russell]

That's the independence this American citizen would like to celebrate.

A truly religious person must, be definition, put his religion/God first, and he can't do that and follow our constitution if he sees them in conflict.

That person has a built in conflict of interests.

Depends on the religion. Being a Christian or a Jew didn't mean you had to kill every Roman you encountered.

[David G]

Another sinkhole of ill-informed anti-religious bias & bigotry. <sigh>

To answer the OP: No. Until our species fully groks all... literally becomes gods... there will be an urge to reach for a fuller understanding. Like science, but in matters less concrete. And to write our hypotheses down. And for some to treat those essays as gospel, instead of useful speculation and advice. To, iow, create 'religions'.

And there will always be the urge to talk about our thoughts on the ineffable... to come together in community to further our explorations. To, iow, to create 'churches'.

And such efforts can be sublimely useful, or can be used perversely. There are always damaged sorts who gravitate toward avenues to power. As a balm to their stunted and withered souls.

It doesn't matter what SORT of human institution... it can be used perversely.

"When there is an accumulation of money and power into fewer and fewer hands, people with the mentality of gangsters come to the fore. Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely" -- Lord Acton

[CWSmith]

Before Faux News there was Readers Digest.
Back in the '60s this was going the rounds:
"When does WASP feel uninformed?
When his Readers Digest Mag is late in the post.
When is a WASP misinformed?
When he has read his Readers Digest."

When I was younger it seems I kept running into that publication. It was usually when I was forced to sit and wait somewhere. It struck me as being one step up from a comic book and I didn't like comic books.

[John Smith]

John, people of religious faith are simply voting their values just like you. If you don't like it, change their minds.

People who vote their religious values, by definition, are not voting based upon our constitution. I have no objection to people practicing their religion, but I do object to them putting it into laws that impact all of us.

I've been at many events where, before we began to eat, someone stood up and said a blessing. A FEW of those were kind enough to ask if anyone minded. I appreciated that. I didn't really care, but I was irked that one would do so without asking. Seems some have the believe/opinion that ALL present share his beliefs.

[John Smith]

I’ve been independent from religion since I was 17.
Religion is just a way to make $$ from faith. Nothing more than a business, and a damn lucrative one at that.

It's become more than that. It is now an influence in our elections and our politics, our laws, and our courts.

[John Smith]

I'd like you to sit in on a budget meeting at my church as we try to make ends meet. Most people wouldn't get out of bed for the money we pay our staff and clergy, yet they are working for a higher purpose then money.
Believe me, it is not a business and is anything but lucrative.

It could be that you are basing your opinion on a handful of mega-church leaders who do indeed become filthy rich off the back of their parishioners who can't really afford it.

When I was in high school, a modest sized church didn't like the movie a local theater was showing and organized a picket line of protestors outside the theater.

Would you not agree that was a church going too far. Simply choosing not to buy tickets to see the movie would have been appropriate, no? And I wonder how many members of that church saw the movie. If they'd not actually seen it, how did they know they should not see it?

Why is it any of their business, if I chose to see it?

[John Smith]

Depends on the religion. Being a Christian or a Jew didn't mean you had to kill every Roman you encountered.

Maybe times have changed. Today it provides more protection for the fetus than the woman.

Religion is something, in my humble opinion, YOU have the right to live by, but you do not have the right to force others to live by your religious beliefs.

[George Jung]

Seems I've heard *somewhere* that as a whole, the USA population is becoming less religious- but the 'oldsters', many of whom are hyper-religious, are more likely to vote, and vote for those candidates catering to their world-view. Certainly see it in nebraska. I don't think many folk could get elected, were they to espouse atheism.

So.... we get lead by the nose.

[John Smith]

Simply put, the laws of the US should be based on constitutional concepts, not religious beliefs.

That's really all I ask.

When I was older, and had kids of my own, I was visiting people who went to church, so I went with them, and behaved myself. "Last Temptation of Christ" was a current movie, and the Pastor was talking about how sinful it was to make such a movie. He advised his congregation to boycott theaters showing it.

I asked him if he had seen it. He had not.

What conclusion was I to draw?

[CWSmith]

People who vote their religious values, by definition, are not voting based upon our constitution. I have no objection to people practicing their religion, but I do object to them putting it into laws that impact all of us.

I've been at many events where, before we began to eat, someone stood up and said a blessing. A FEW of those were kind enough to ask if anyone minded. I appreciated that. I didn't really care, but I was irked that one would do so without asking. Seems some have the believe/opinion that ALL present share his beliefs.

John, you are too easily offended. As a Catholic, I would not think twice of participating in a Jewish prayer. If someone says a satanic prayer, I would simply refrain.

As for the constitution, it does not expressly guarantee anyone the right to an abortion, or social security, or health care, or a roof over their heads. It was only a matter of time before Roe v Wade came back because it was law made by the court. It is now time for us to pass the laws that the legislature ran from. You are blaming people who think differently from you because they think differently from you when you should be blaming the politicians who failed to pass the laws that would still be standing.

[LeeG]

That's the independence this American citizen would like to celebrate.

A truly religious person must, be definition, put his religion/God first, and he can't do that and follow our constitution if he sees them in conflict.

That person has a built in conflict of interests.

No more than any person can have conflicts.

[Peerie Maa]

John, you are too easily offended. As a Catholic, I would not think twice of participating in a Jewish prayer. If someone says a satanic prayer, I would simply refrain.

As for the constitution, it does not expressly guarantee anyone the right to an abortion, or social security, or health care, or a roof over their heads. It was only a matter of time before Roe v Wade came back because it was law made by the court. It is now time for us to pass the laws that the legislature ran from. You are blaming people who think differently from you because they think differently from you when you should be blaming the politicians who failed to pass the laws that would still be standing.

^ This.
Although the Constitution, whilst silent, specifically, on those issues, and so does not rule them out either, it has that clause "For the General Welfare" that does actually demand all of those things.

[Tom Montgomery]

.
Last week Ohio State Rep. Jean Schmidt, a Clermont County Republican, said during a radio interview that she would entertain a debate about outlawing birth control in the wake of the United States Supreme Court overturning constitutional protections for abortion.

[CWSmith]

^ This does not surprise me. The most vocal elements within the GOP are completely without restraint and will leap frog each other in an effort to push the clock back as far as they can.

[stromborg]

Much like guns, we seem to be awash in religions in this country. The question is not will we ever be free of religion but will enough of those who believe in one myth ever be willing to coexist with those who don't believe in the same myth that we can get along?

I try to follow this:


But that doesn't seem to work for the conservative monotheists who are currently giving the rest of you believers a bad name.