Religion
So my girlfriend and I had a talk last night about religion. Our discussion was nothing extremely serious, just trying to feel out where each other stood on it and what base beliefs were. As it stands I am a non-practicing Roman Catholic from a deep Roman Catholic background and she is a New Age Buddhist from a Presbyterian background.
Both of us interpret and alter our personal beliefs from any one particular dogma or teaching.
A typical Buddhist varies in beliefs but one of their central tenets is not to let a "belief" blind you a truth. And the truths they talk about are suffering, causation of suffering, cessation of suffering, and the path. Basically they try to use meditation and pure living to make themselves better people and attempt to reach a spiritual awareness and calm.
As she asked me my beliefs I had to reply that when it comes to what I believe that I am very wishy-washy. I believe that if a person feels bad about themself, feels they need to "clean up" their life, or make changes in their attitude or living style then they should seek help in any form possible that preaches and guides a person to better living. I believe that religion can help people that seek change or guidance because they are having problems seeing the way on their own.
Personally I love myself. I told her I would not change a thing about myself and I do not need any one to show me a path to better living because my life, for me, in the way I am living it, is the best method. And because I do not need to change I do not need religion to tell me that I am not living my life correctly.
I also have an innate prejudice against religion. I do not feel any person has the right to tell another person how they should feel or live their life.
Now of course there are limitations to this thinking, I am not saying that a person has the right to harm or kill another unless that person if defending themself or another from physical harm. But I feel people take the "attack in defense" to protect people from beliefs or ways of living.
I do not believe we need to wipe out a couple of million Muslims and force them into a democracy if the majority of them want to live in a theocracy. I do not believe that any person has the right to condemn gays because of their lifestyle. And I do not believe that any religion knows what happens to you when you die and what you need to do to achieve salvation.
All religion was written, interpreted, and built on by mankind. Humans are a flawed race and self destructive. If we had a "perfect" creator then he would not have made us flawed.
I wrote the next line talking about flaws vs. free will and my thoughts about the difference 4 times. Each time I back spaced it out thinking about how to explain a difference between the two rationally. How can you say that a creator giving us free will to do evil is a flaw? And how can you explain the ability to do evil and the desire for that evil to be done to others is not a good thing and if people can not see that then it is a bug in our programming? Then how do you make that case to a religious person?
Then I remembered. Religious people are not rational. To argue with them about religion proves your point to a rational mind and proves that faith solves all to a religious mind. Only when arguing about religion can two people walk away from the argument knowing that they were right and that they felt they changed the other person for the better by fighting about it.
Now tell me that isn't a flaw.
So my girlfriend and I had a talk last night about religion. Our discussion was nothing extremely serious, just trying to feel out where each other stood on it and what base beliefs were. As it stands I am a non-practicing Roman Catholic from a deep Roman Catholic background and she is a New Age Buddhist from a Presbyterian background.
Both of us interpret and alter our personal beliefs from any one particular dogma or teaching.
A typical Buddhist varies in beliefs but one of their central tenets is not to let a "belief" blind you a truth. And the truths they talk about are suffering, causation of suffering, cessation of suffering, and the path. Basically they try to use meditation and pure living to make themselves better people and attempt to reach a spiritual awareness and calm.
As she asked me my beliefs I had to reply that when it comes to what I believe that I am very wishy-washy. I believe that if a person feels bad about themself, feels they need to "clean up" their life, or make changes in their attitude or living style then they should seek help in any form possible that preaches and guides a person to better living. I believe that religion can help people that seek change or guidance because they are having problems seeing the way on their own.
Personally I love myself. I told her I would not change a thing about myself and I do not need any one to show me a path to better living because my life, for me, in the way I am living it, is the best method. And because I do not need to change I do not need religion to tell me that I am not living my life correctly.
I also have an innate prejudice against religion. I do not feel any person has the right to tell another person how they should feel or live their life.
Now of course there are limitations to this thinking, I am not saying that a person has the right to harm or kill another unless that person if defending themself or another from physical harm. But I feel people take the "attack in defense" to protect people from beliefs or ways of living.
I do not believe we need to wipe out a couple of million Muslims and force them into a democracy if the majority of them want to live in a theocracy. I do not believe that any person has the right to condemn gays because of their lifestyle. And I do not believe that any religion knows what happens to you when you die and what you need to do to achieve salvation.
All religion was written, interpreted, and built on by mankind. Humans are a flawed race and self destructive. If we had a "perfect" creator then he would not have made us flawed.
I wrote the next line talking about flaws vs. free will and my thoughts about the difference 4 times. Each time I back spaced it out thinking about how to explain a difference between the two rationally. How can you say that a creator giving us free will to do evil is a flaw? And how can you explain the ability to do evil and the desire for that evil to be done to others is not a good thing and if people can not see that then it is a bug in our programming? Then how do you make that case to a religious person?
Then I remembered. Religious people are not rational. To argue with them about religion proves your point to a rational mind and proves that faith solves all to a religious mind. Only when arguing about religion can two people walk away from the argument knowing that they were right and that they felt they changed the other person for the better by fighting about it.
Now tell me that isn't a flaw.