• BookTalk.org News will soon go out via email in HTML format. The goal will be to keep people posted on our current book discussions and other relevant news items.
• Contest #2: "On The Importance of Reading" has started. Visit the Contests forum - the very top thread.
Please support our free community by making a credit card donation through our secure PayPal account. We appreciate and depend on the generosity of our members. Thank you!
I do not think that is true at all… I think that even without religion kind people would still be generous and nasty people would still be poop heads; what religion does offer is the organization to make things happen, people unaffiliated with a church have a much harder time getting their help to the people who need it.
This kinda' veers off, I guess, but I'll tell it anyway . . .
I think the reason religious organizations have a problem with getting volunteer help is because of some of the 'religious volunteers' themselves.
I worked a volunteer in a place called St. Francis Table - Friday mornings only. The job involved a little food prep in the early part of the morning, then I attended the 'social room' after.
I was 'hostess' there - poured coffee for people, etc.
It was indeed a 'smoking room' - the designated smoking area. As I smoke myself, it didn't bother me.
Another woman, who took the job on mornings during the week came in once to thoroughly put me in my place - she started dictating to me what I was to clean up afterwards - talking down to me like I was some skivvy.
I think she thought I was one of the 'work training students' - the people who absolutely 'had to be there'.
Actually I wasn't - I took the job on because I wanted to do it - I wanted to be involved.
I just didn't go back.
----------------------------
I was also offended by one of the 'Brothers' there - he acted as if I was some kind of user . . . he came by my station one morning to see what I needed for my counter - I told him I just loved the chocolate covered biscuits - bring some of those.
He said 'I think Carly, you're here just to help yourself - you don't really want to help those in need'.
I really didn't think that was called for.
----------------------------
When I later ran into Brother Allan (the guy whose command I worked under - he and I got on great - I just loved the guy) he asked when I was coming back - I told him I wasn't and why - he also didn't care for the 'other brother' and understood that.
And the lady - the self-appointed 'boss' - he said you don't have to worry about her anymore - she's having heart surgery.
I said 'I suppose I'm suppose to express my great sympathy, eh?'
Religious indeed - I can live without those kinda' religious people.
An 'employment counsellor' told me that I shouldn't have been there anyway - it was more or less a place for trainees to train - while I was there, I was doing somebody else out of a place to train.
---------------------
Volunteer situations - even when they have nothing to do with religion - they can be tricky.
I live just over from High Park - it's a very large park here in Toronto - one of the largest in the world. Anyway, the community was building a big playground and we were encouraged to volunteer.
I went over and did a couple of short stints - but I found there wasn't any place you could fit in - some of the women there on the 'sign-up' tables - they were old girls and kinda' considered their places as being something to be protected.
When I was given a seat from which to sign people in, one of them was quite indignant when she came back from her break.
I think it's because they were seniors - out in the 'work force' once again - being made to feel like they had 'jobs', so they were a bit defensive of those 'jobs'.
If any of you old blue-hairs from my neighbourhood are reading this, lemme' give ya' a little advice . . .
LIGHTEN UP, LADIES!
Heh! Heh!
-----------------------
Anyway, this long-winded as always, little piece was just to tell about 'religion' and how 'religious groups' might be better able to find volunteers - you might make people feel like they are needed and are welcome to take a 'place' in your organization.
You 'religious' ladies don't need to become anybody's 'boss'.
Guess it's time for me to check outta' here . . . I just want to say that although I've had a bit of religious training (as you can glean from some of my posts) especially when very young, I don't really consider myself as being 'anything' when asked 'what religion?'
I'm a protestant, I guess and that (to me) means that I am not a Roman Catholic.
I've been into a few things - I love Buddhism - I've studied Hari Krishna and I've delved into the 'ghastly pagan' Wicca.
The aforementioned 'three', btw, are not necessarily 'Godless'.
Some Buddhists believe in God - some Buddhists do not believe in God.
Some Buddhists consider their 'buddhism' as being a 'philosophy'.
Some Buddhists consider their 'buddhism' as being a religion.
A Buddhist does not have to believe in a 'God' in order to be a Buddhist. A Buddhist does not have to 'not believe' in a 'god' in order to be a Buddhist.
The same goes for Wicca - there's the Goddess of the Moon . . . you don't have to believe she's a God - like Jesus - a Wiccan (and some Wiccans do) can attend and be a member of the church! Any church!
Wicca is a 'way of life' more than anything else. Yes, it involves witchcraft - WHITE witchcraft - NOT the evil kind.
Hari Krishna - Krishna, of course, is God.
All of those are fine by me.
I believe in God - I don't believe in 'religion'.
I am not against anyone who does believe in their 'religion'.
I do not believe in justifying the killing or injuring of other human beings in the name of God.
So what I'm trying to say is that even though I enjoy 'religious' discussions, I am not 'religious', nor am I an 'atheist'.
I believe in living my life according to what I instinctively feel is 'right'. If it's not 'right' I don't do it.
I didn't mean that I'm taking a break from the forums, just that I seem to have worn out the topic I was on for now. I'm getting too much out the experience to want to stop talking with such interesting people . Thanks for the remark.
I didn't read more than the first pages of this thread, hope that's ok with everyone.
I don't think that religion is the problem, the problem is people who don't think critically.
Maybe religion manipulates people to think irrational, but I think it's more common, at least in the western world, that people adhere to religion because they are irrational.
Also, although a lot of the conflicts and wars are and have been cloaked in religious terms, usually there is a economic or social conflict of interests behind it. To blame religion would be to simplify, since religion can be interpreted to make people behave more peaceful as well, "love thy neighbor " and so on.
Religion can be seen as a frame of reference and a way to express yourself, and does not necessarily have to be dogmatic.
To make things clear, I am in no way a religious person myself, although there was a time when I believed in God and had religious experiences.
Samson
I don't think that religion is the problem; the problem is people who don't think critically.
Maybe religion manipulates people to think irrational, but I think it's more common, at least in the western world, that people adhere to religion because they are irrational.
I don’t think that that possibility has been shown conclusively… I also think that it is more probable that the religious are irrational because the umbrella of religion encourages that kind of thinking.
After all most of those people can think critically about subjects outside of their religion, even bringing those critical thinking skills to the table when confronted with other religions, they simply seem incapable of submitting their own beliefs to the same scrutiny.
Quote:
Samson
Also, although a lot of the conflicts and wars are and have been cloaked in religious terms, usually there is a economic or social conflict of interests behind it.
Religions have been used as a cover for wars with deeper issues, that I have no doubt; but that neither clears the religion of any wrong doing, or completes the list of religion’s harm to society.
Don’t forget in many situations the church itself was the driving force of those wars, the church has often been the tyrannical entity looking to enhance its reach and power and to block out or destroy any competition or opposition.
In those situations religion was still the tool used to motivate the people to do terrible things; that alone makes it dangerous. Religious beliefs help dehumanize the enemy; (Ideas like killing a non-believer is not a sin in the eyes of god and so forth…) Religion also offers rewards to its believers that no secular entity can match… Destroying the infidels in the name of god as a pathway to heaven is an idea common to both Christianity and Islam.
I have said this all before but one point remains clear above all others… only a religious person can believe that they will be eternally rewarded for murdering another human being.
I posted this in another thread but it appears to be relevant here…
Quote:
The most religious societies have the most crime and social dysfunction on every measurable scale.
The claim of ultimate truth and as a result bigotry to those who do not believe the same thing is a huge problem among religious believers. This can be used by those in control to justify murder (see Islam for references to such atrocities in the modern age) or even to control who marries who (Gays cannot marry because it is a sin in the eyes of god; Catholics are only supposed to marry other Catholics). The first example does in fact cause suffering; I suspect that the second often does as well.
Those ideas often permeate deep into a persons psyche causing bigotry on a much more personal scale resulting in cultural clashes in all levels of society. Religions can and do create (perceived) disparities between people when no other differences are evident or noteworthy.
After all it is not the government that decided to boycott Harry Potter books and burn them… The idea to send death threats to the gallery that was going to display the “my sweet Jesus” chocolate sculpture was not initiated by some economic problem. The motivation to stop gay marriage only seems to be an idea promoted by the religious… need I go on?
Quote:
Samson
To blame religion would be to simplify, since religion can be interpreted to make people behave more peaceful as well, "love thy neighbor” and so on.
I do not think it’s a simplification to say that removing religion would seriously hamper any efforts to manipulate the masses, religion's power to manipulate is unmatched.
After all what other reason could there be to get insulted about a chocolate Jesus? Or destroy books and ban movies because of the fear that they promote witchcraft? Blocking gay marriage, how is this in any way economic?
These things are only offensive because religion says they are... furthermore in the case of gay marriage it is not anyone's business… unless for some reason a person has been convinced into believing that it could somehow cause harm to society... which is the churches' stance on the issue; a stance with zero evidence to support it I might add.
This is the control to manipulate that I speak of, and if you are thinking about saying that those people are fanatics and are a minority… well that simply is not true. If it were, gay marriage would not be banned in 48 of the 50 states.
Quote:
Samson
Religion can be seen as a frame of reference and a way to express yourself, and does not necessarily have to be dogmatic.
You are correct, if you could just get the believers to agree then there would be little to argue about.
Samson
Religion can be seen as a frame of reference and a way to express yourself, and does not necessarily have to be dogmatic.
Frank, despite the conservative influence that religion can exert on social policy, I think that also there are many more people in the category indicated by Samson than you seem willing to concede. Even those who might say they fervently believe in their theology are not necessarily dogmatic, in my view, if they they observe the proper boundaries--as most do. That is, they do not approach me as a person who needs to get with the beliefs they hold. That these beliefs might be labeled as irrational would be a weak and even narrow-minded reason for attacking them.
Again, the view of religion as monolithic, and with it that any hint of a religious sentiment is a problem by definition, just isn't truly reasonable in itself, is it? Not that I can see.
Looks like my break was a short one! By the way, I had also wondered what you were holding in your photo and am glad to have the mystery resolved.
Will
