Religion, Secularism & Politics in the Twenty-First Century

[DJ Barney]

I found this article through the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry website.

My initial reaction was this...

"Aren't we being attacked by Terrorists .... NOT 'religous people' ?"

The Bible says "Thou shalt not kill" and I think the Koran says something very similiar. Now, you'd be correct if you said "well the Bible says all sorts of things". Of course it is massively misinterpreted, often by people looking for ways to justify their actions rather than examine them.

But are'nt those people in the extreme, the worst kind of Religious misguided fools ?

I am all for CSI and an understanding of how society works, but as a Religous person myself I bristle a bit at the suggestion that I am following a creed that is undermining society in some way. In fact I don't really follow organised religion. I have my own independent ideas going back to Ancient Egypt. Ideas that would inspire the Greeks, and eventually, in part, lead to the modern Science we follow today. This is not a "fringe" idea but is well know in Academia, Archaelogy and the History of Science (see Jesus and the Lost Goddess: The Secret Teachings of the Original Christians, or any history of original Greek thought, or even The Spirituality of Science: Ann Druyan on a New Collection of Carl Sagan Lectures
). Many of the first logicians were closely related to Greek religous and spiritual ideas, as have been many Scientists over the centuries. Turning to Spiritual wonderment and Religous thinking when they reached the edge of their Science. This did not mean they gave up their intellect. Far from it. I have come to appreciate Religion and Spirituality, in all it's world forms (Buddhist, Hindu, Celtic, Gnostic ...) as a vital tool that can be used to understand one's deeper and more subconscious ideas and feelings.

Myths and Legends contain many profound ideas about human behaviour, but do we throw them out as "unscientific" ?

So I find it disturbing to find CSI , or this meeting, talking about Religion as "the enemy", or saying that we live in a "Secular Society" when millions, if not billions of people follow Religion everyday in one form or another !

I am not alone in these ideas. Chairman of The Planetary Society Neil deGrasse Tyson, discussed similar ideas at the "Beyond Belief" conference, in his own unique way. He uses a story about Science and Art from his own life.

To be secular is also a completely valid way of existing and should be respected like any other pursuit, but I do wonder if the "God Debate" could do with some fresh air blowing into it !

DJ Barney

[Chuck]

If a thread is about both politics and religion, do the two bans cancel out making it a legal topic?

[NEOWatcher]

If a thread is about both politics and religion, do the two bans cancel out making it a legal topic?

Which makes secularism the tie-breaker...

I would say, even if the OP is discussing the scientific aspects of the discussion that is going on, the potential for the discussion to get out of hand exists.

I will wait and see what will happen or what the mods think. I'm not sure if this warrents a report.

[Lurker]

The problem with religious and spiritual beliefs is that they are by their very nature not scientific. I am a curious mix of Buddhist and Pagan. I do not attempt to put forward scientific proofs of my spiritual path to prove that it is "correct". Science is a cold, rather ruthless tool, specifically designed to separate that which is "provably" true from all that cannot be "proved" to be true. It is ruthless in disgarding something that may be true, but cannot be proven true, rather than risk accepting something that might turn out to be false.

Many people, myself included, are not interested in living our lives that way. While I would not wish to fly in a plane that was not designed with the most critical of science, I am not willing to live my whole life that way. My spiritual beliefs are very real to me... I believe in them quite deeply, but I cannot offer, nor am I interested in offering, rigorous scientific proof of their correctness. In the absence of such proof, science is forced by its very design to not accept my beliefs as a proven fact.

This is fine with me... science is a wonderful and very powerful tool, but does not satisfactorily explain for me the deep love I feel for my lost lover, nor does it explain the certainty that I feel that all is connected into a single whole. In the end, I follow my path... I use the tool of science where I wish but my life is defined by and given meaning by my spiritual path. If others wish to live differently, they are welcome define and follow their own path...

[nauthiz]

I didn't really get the impression that this page was meant to be an attack on religion in general. Secularism isn't about stamping out faith. It's about things like separation of church and state, and not letting religious groups try to stamp out free thought and inquiry. In fact, as a member of a minority religion I'd say that secularism is one of the best friends I have.

[Michael Noonan]

I didn't really get the impression that this page was meant to be an attack on religion in general. Secularism isn't about stamping out faith. It's about things like separation of church and state, and not letting religious groups try to stamp out free thought and inquiry. In fact, as a member of a minority religion I'd say that secularism is one of the best friends I have.

From Wiki:-
Secularism is generally the assertion or belief that certain practices or institutions should exist separately from religion or religious belief.

reference here

Provided it is analytical and has a direction which does not single out any particular belief structure as 'bad' which means not naming them or their references, fair game.

If it is about how is society reacting to the pressure of physical terrorism on a daily basis and the effect it is having on the population then it is science.

If a comparison is made to statistically calculating the odds of actually being in a belief system that gets to Paradise then fine it is mathematics.

If it is a discussion about how annoying it is to be constantly pestered by anti-terrorist this or that bombardment and the detrimental effect it has on the population in this life. Then by way of a comparison to the detrimental effect the bombardment of so many groups wanting to deny the bulk of the population access to the next life it is psychology.

Could be playing with fire but we will have to see.

[Michael Noonan]

If it means a loss of on line game playing I am pretty sure I can drag in more than a few people who would be quite vocal and still have nothing to say about religion or politics.

Again From Wiki:-
Secularism is generally the assertion or belief that certain practices or institutions should exist separately from religion or religious belief.

I assure you the people denied access to that life would be very secular.

[ToSeek]

It sounds like a fascinating topic, but not on this forum, sorry. Closed.