General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsReligion without God
I totally get this!! I understand what the author is saying because of my recent experiences hearing preachers from a predominantly black church talking about what people who care are experiencing together.
It was the first time I remember feeling like I was a part of the conversation when they used theological language. I have a new appreciation for what attracts people to the clergy who lead those services. I also have a clearer understanding for how people experience the world because of their belief that there is a benevolent being that backs them up.
One woman expressed actual joy at having met me because I talked about Shirley Chisholm with her. She exclaimed some "praise the lords" and I began to think that the existence of a God as a positive motivating force is worthy of my respect. There are people who are absolutely elated about it sometimes. I feel very happy for them.
Why should the building that houses an organization dedicated to common principles, stories, ceremonies and rituals devalue what we have in common altogether?
I would like to see more of us, as atheists, respect and even celebrate theological institutions for what they bring people who may have values similar to ours. I'm thinking a new years resolution may be to might test how it works in practice with some people who I know who are hurting in ways similar to myself.
Can it just be about people and relationships where we find satisfaction in what brings others happiness and gets them through the night?
I've been reading Bobby Kennedy's autobiography and I love this.....
Religion is fundamentally a practice that helps people to look at the world as it is and yet to experience it to some extent, in some way as it should be. Much of what people actually do in church finding fellowship, celebrating birth and marriage, remembering those we have lost, affirming the values we cherish can be accomplished with a sense of God as metaphor, as story, or even without any mention of God at all.
Yet religion without God may be more poignant. Atheists trust in human relations, not supernatural ones, and humans are not so good at delivering the world as it should be. Perhaps that is why we are moved by Christmas carols, which conjure up the world as it can be and not the world we know.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/25/opinion/religion-without-god.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur&bicmp=AD&bicmlukp=WT.mc_id&bicmst=1409232722000&bicmet=1419773522000&_r=0
tecelote
(5,122 posts)And, many people respect others right to it or not to believe. I'm an atheist yet some of the people I respect the most are very religious.
The problem is evangelizing. Religion should be a personal choice and not a requirement.
loyalsister
(13,390 posts)I saw an anthropologist give a talk about it as "artifying" experience. Storytelling, materials designed for rituals, visual art documenting stories and ceremonies had an asthetic quality. She argued that a set of common moral principles was adaptive, and that the artistic expressions were binding especially when it came to celebration, mourning, simple daily activities, and explaining the unknown. During an earlier time, it likely served to keep competitors for resources from killing each other. Sadly it has evolved into a reason for doing so. Also a tool for indoctrination and othering. One could argue that those practices are also somewhat adaptative in a sort of tribal sense. The irony of people who reject evolution behaving in ways that, under some circumstances could promote tribal survival is kind of entertaining to me. In a world where survival of the species requires conscious effort belief in "democracy" has been tribally adaptive. Unfortunately so has antiintellectualism. And here we are now at a point where belief in belief at a larger scale could do us in.
tecelote
(5,122 posts)Many everyday people need religion. They need guidance.
Many educated people take a step beyond that. They decide to be part of a particular church because of factors they value. Rather than sheep looking for the herder, they look at the social and personal benefits.
A lot of people that attend church also believe in evolution. I'd bet a majority of scientists and even self-proclaimed liberals attend church.
We should separate church from religion to some extent.
And, we should educate Americans like we did a few decades ago.
An educated America is the key to our survival as a species on planet earth. W
loyalsister
(13,390 posts)Without a doubt!
Church as in congregation and religion as doctrine might be a useful construct for separation. So many of my family members and people who I consider friends are observers of various religions. I respect the observation of most of them.
In my area, one of the most positive influences during the recent activism has been an interfaith alliance. In every mention of diversity and civil rights, they include LGBT. Even an Amish woman spoke at one of our rallies.
After seeing all of that, I am reading MLK speeches with a different mindset.
MineralMan
(146,317 posts)That has always been true.
ProfessorGAC
(65,076 posts)Also, (although i shouldn't say this here), the Zen of golf where for 5 seconds, nothing else matters and nothing else exists.
MineralMan
(146,317 posts)ProfessorGAC
(65,076 posts)I'm concerned the whole site might crash if i do.
MineralMan
(146,317 posts)Site's still running, it seems.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)Coventina
(27,121 posts)In its original form, anyway....
951-Riverside
(7,234 posts)...and maybe Scientology