I enjoy Karen's writing and thinking. Your comments, like Karen's comments are, are trying to find an answer without acknowledging the paradigm may be defective. I offer the following thoughts. If anyone would like to see the conclusion I will be happy to complete the publication. Thank you for letting me "blog."&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp Dogma - Life or Death?Dogma is to my spirit, as an egg shell to the chick. I was birthed within it and could not develop free from Dogma's relentless presence, but if I do not break free of it, Dogma will entomb my soul. &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp My use of the word Dogma is limited to religious doctrine. Dogma is a theological term for doctrine, or a body of doctrines, relating to matters such as morality (what a god wants the believers to do or not do), and faith (what a believer develops as a result of trusting the god of that Dogma over time). Dogma is set forth in an authoritative manner by employee(s) of an organized religion. These principles, beliefs, or statements of ideas or opinion about their god, are usually required to be considered absolutely true in order to be a member of the organized religion stating the Dogma. &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp Dogma, as thus defined, is humanity's attempt at a logical explanation of and a personal belief system about, life after death. Each moment of life in the body and mind, is an experience most people call an empirical fact. The death of the body is a fact most everyone acknowledges. Whether there is a spirit of the person, that does not die, is something to believe or not but it is not a fact. Only the god of a personal belief system offers an explanation about life after death for that believer. Dogma, on the other hand, which is the logic of man about a god, offers much more than an explanation about life after death. Dogma directs the life choices of believers, and through civil government, non believers as well. It is the nature of those who publicly declare their Dogma to be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, also declare their Dogma is a fact of life that is true, absolutely true, for all persons. The fact is, the answer to the question of life after death, is that there is no answer

I recently attended Karen's lecture on this book. I heard her thesis statement to be, "It doesn't matter what you believe, atheist, buddist, christian, etc., we will not live in peace with each other until everyone learns to respect the 'holyness' of each individual." There is a very rational basis why each of us should treat all others with respect. Our own knowledge, understanding, and wisdom in everything is incomplete, inaccurate, or in error and so is everyone elses. A little humility will carry us all a long way toward our goal to peace. Relationships will need to become more important than being right.

Well...I can buy this. I do indeed feel this way, reading your words:Quote:Our own knowledge, understanding, and wisdom in everything is incomplete, inaccurate, or in error and so is everyone elses. A little humility will carry us all a long wayis a way I have looked at things. I will say that I have low tolerance for religion and belief in a god though...as that seems so improbable that I feel it should be left behind.BUT...as I always have said, so long as that faith and belief are kept to the PERSONAL sphere...more power to ya! (Not you specifically). The plain fact is that a secular way of life is the most neutral for a mass populace.Mr. P. The one thing of which I am positive is that there is much of which to be negative - Mr. P.The pain in hell has two sides. The kind you can touch with your hand; the kind you can feel in your heart...Scorsese's "Mean Streets"I came to kick ass and chew Bubble Gum...and I am all out of Bubble Gum - They Live, Roddy Piper

The plain fact is that a secular way of life is the most neutral for a mass populace.What do you mean by "neutral"?

I think that would be obvious. by it's nature, a secular society does not promote or inhibit any one religion. It would allow all to thrive on their own merits. As such, it is a neutral force. it takes no sides. A society based on one religion would discriminate based on it's dogma or cannon law.Secular government was endorsed by minority religious groups way back when because of this neutrality...hmm...this should be in the Jacoby discussion...but I will leave it here.Mr. P. The one thing of which I am positive is that there is much of which to be negative - Mr. P.The pain in hell has two sides. The kind you can touch with your hand; the kind you can feel in your heart...Scorsese's "Mean Streets"I came to kick ass and chew Bubble Gum...and I am all out of Bubble Gum - They Live, Roddy Piper

I agree Nick.

Thank you Chris! The one thing of which I am positive is that there is much of which to be negative - Mr. P.The pain in hell has two sides. The kind you can touch with your hand; the kind you can feel in your heart...Scorsese's "Mean Streets"I came to kick ass and chew Bubble Gum...and I am all out of Bubble Gum - They Live, Roddy Piper

So do you mean a secular government, or a secular way of life? I assumed that you meant something particular by way of life, but if you mean a society that tolerates religious difference then it would seem that you're talking about the govenment and not the whole of culture.

I meant as it applies to society as a whole..yes, government...the wayof life of the system.Sorry for the confusion. The one thing of which I am positive is that there is much of which to be negative - Mr. P.The pain in hell has two sides. The kind you can touch with your hand; the kind you can feel in your heart...Scorsese's "Mean Streets"I came to kick ass and chew Bubble Gum...and I am all out of Bubble Gum - They Live, Roddy Piper

Okay, just trying to get it straight in my head. To my mind, a secular government is worlds apart from a secular way of life. When I hear the latter, I infer an almost total absence of religion, whereas a secular government could be either tolerant or bordering on a fascist abolition of religion.