I looked at literally hundreds of photos of Saturday's marches.

[MineralMan]

I saw no signs that were about religion in those photos until a couple were in a link posted here today. The march was in no way about religion or the beliefs of the people who were out there marching. It was not about Jesus, Allah or any other deity. It was about the shame and terror of children being slaughtered in their schools.

Any attempts to link the protests to religion are specious. That is not why hundreds of thousands of people went out to express themselves. And those people would be the first to tell you that. They weren't there because they have religious beliefs. They were there to protest children being killed in schools by people with guns.

I reject any attempt to form such a link. It's a noxious thing to do, and websites that use that march in a religious context are engaging in wrong behavior.

[trotsky]

1. It's because some religious people feel a need to insert their religion into everything.

Those people tend to ruin things for everyone else.

[Major Nikon]

31. Its the method that insures privilege

If everything is about their version of reality, everything else is on the outside looking in.

[Wellstone ruled]

2. So agree,some can not resist the temptation to

project their agendas.

[hlthe2b]

3. I saw a handful in Denver, but definitely a token representation...

Then, again, I typically will see some "religious" presence at every event in Capitol Hill, downtown Denver--Not meaning to offend the "religious", but some of the homeless often latch onto that as a fund-raising tactic and thus tend to come to every protest and event armed with "JESUS" signs.

I agree, though, this was a highly secular protest.

[Arkansas Granny]

4. The march I attended had no religious context at all. There was no prayer and no reference to

God or the Bible. No preachers spoke. The emphasis was on enacting stricter gun control and voting for those candidates who are willing to work toward that goal.

[Heartstrings]

5. Might want to check out this op I posted Sunday....

It does indeed contain religious overtones.....

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100210412629

[MineralMan]

6. What percentage of the signs expressed such things?

Did you attend a march? Did you notice?

[Heartstrings]

8. I did attend a march in Madison, WI

Neither saw nor heard any references.....this was sent to me by a friend on Facebook....

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

7. Some people did go because of, or were at least partly motivated by, their religious beliefs.

I am personally familiar with several such people - they got a fairly large group together from their very liberal church to attend the St. Paul march. They were motivated by the desire to end gun violence, of course, but their inspiration had definite Christian underpinnings (e.g., Jesus doesn't like it when children are murdered in their schools). It's not accurate to say that there was no religious motivation whatsoever on the part of any of the million + people who participated in these marches. We all know how much you dislike any manifestation of religion in public, but religion does, in fact, motivate many people, and not always in bad ways.

[trotsky]

9. I read MM's post again...

and he doesn't appear to say individual people couldn't be *motivated* by their religious beliefs. So your response seems unwarranted.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

10. The OP said "They weren't there because they have religious beliefs."

I took that to mean that he didn't think anybody at the march was motivated by their religious beliefs. But some people clearly were, and there's nothing wrong with that.

[trotsky]

12. Let me ask you this:

Do you think those people attended *only* because they are religious, or was it because they care about the issue?

That's the distinction. And can we agree there is absolutely no need to make religion a feature or focus of the protests?

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

13. I don't know anyone's specific motivation.

I agree that the event itself was, and should have been, secular. However, I also believe that some people might care about the issue of gun violence at least in part because their religion advocates nonviolence. There was no reason to make the event an overtly religious one, and that wasn't done anyhow.

[trotsky]

14. Wait, in your post #7 you said you were personally familiar with such people.

But here you claim you don't know anyone's motivation?

I am confused.

You do seem to admit that the focus was on the issue - gun violence - and not religious belief, which seems to have been MM's point.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

16. OK, I wasn't clear. The people I know who went to the march with their church group

went for the same reason as pretty much everybody: because they were opposed to gun violence. I also know that they are all very liberal and that their liberalism, including their concerns about gun violence, is very much informed by their Christian beliefs, including their commitment to nonviolence. I would have liked to go, too (I was unable to do so) although my reasons are slightly different: as a non-religious person I simply think our gun culture is seriously messed up and needs to end so people don't keep getting shot in huge numbers.

I think the OP was trying to make the point that religion was not a factor in the march, and to the extent that it didn't involve prayers or other overt religious manifestations, that was true. But I guess I don't really understand the purpose of the OP, though, because he seemed to be objecting to something that didn't actually happen. There were no religious ceremonies, maybe a few signs, but it wasn't a religious event. My only point was that some people might have religious beliefs that affect or motivate their outwardly secular behavior, and that the religious beliefs of some of those marchers affected their interest in the issue.

[trotsky]

17. "because they were opposed to gun violence"

Which is what I interpreted as MM's point. I'll let him clarify further to you if he wants. I don't see a point in continuing this quibbling. You have a beef with what you think he said versus what I think he said.

[guillaumeb]

21. T remember when you ciriticized me

for making reaction posts such as this one. Interesting, is it not, that this post is apparently a reaction to this one of mine:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1218&pid=276374

[trotsky]

23. And I will continue to criticize you as long as you engage in your behavior.

If you don't understand how your posts differ from MineralMan's, that's not my problem.

[guillaumeb]

28. Ah yes, the essential difference.

We both know what that difference is.

[trotsky]

32. No, I don't think you do.

That's the problem.

[guillaumeb]

39. Ironic.

[trotsky]

45. Cute.

But pathetic.

[guillaumeb]

46. Again, partly ironic.

[NeoGreen]

11. Did you see any explicitly...

...atheist signs?

Would a derisive "Hopes & Prayers" sign be considered "atheist"?

[Mariana]

15. Many religious people hold the "Thoughts & Prayers" crowd in contempt.

So, the people holding those derisive "Thoughts & Prayers" signs may very well be religious.

[NeoGreen]

33. Sounds to me like...

...those who hold "thoughts and prayers" in contempt, are confused about what "religious" means...

(substitute "you" with "they" )

[Mariana]

34. Many religious people prefer to take action.

No doubt they pray, but they don't pretend it's a substitute for actually doing something. The ones I know don't think highly of the many high-profile religious people who get in front of teevee cameras babbling about their thoughts and prayers and doing exactly nothing to improve things.

[NeoGreen]

35. I would willingly concede "many" but...

...I would strenuously argue that it is most certainly not "most" and those who actually take action would take action even in the absence of any religion. Religion is not a catalyst to positive action that would not happen in the absence of religion.

[Mariana]

36. We agree. nt.

[MineralMan]

22. Can't say I did.

The marches were not about religion, one way or another. Religion was entirely irrelevant to the need to stop school shootings.

[lostnfound]

18. Who is linking it to religion?

Context is missing.

[guillaumeb]

19. This is the context:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1218&pid=276374

A post that discusses a number of church groups that went to the march.

[lostnfound]

25. Thanks. Nt

[guillaumeb]

20. Were you offended by this post:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1218&pid=276374

If so, please explain why.

[Act_of_Reparation]

24. He already did.

It was not a religious protest. It was not organized by churches. It was not led by churches. It was conceived, organized, and executed by a student group with no religious affiliations.

Then the folks at ReligionNews come along and hijack the story to make it about them. It's some extraordinarily goofy shit, even by the standards of that rag.

[guillaumeb]

29. The article did not state that it was a religious protest, simply that religious people

attended.

[MineralMan]

37. Well, since the majority of people have religious beliefs,

that's hardly surprising. It was not, however, a religious demonstration. Not at all.

[guillaumeb]

40. You are arguing against a position that no one here took.

Why?

[HopeAgain]

26. Would you have made the same argument about the civil rights movement and MLK?

Most these gun huggers claim to be Christians. I see no problem pointing out hypocrisy.

[MineralMan]

27. No, not necessarily. Religious leaders played a large role in the

civil rights movement. I was involved in that to some degree as a young man, although not as much as I should have been, perhaps. At every protest and demonstration, black and white religious leaders were in the front lines. Religious groups were also heavily involved in opposing civil rights. There was no escaping that connection between religion and the movement.

This gun control issue, on the other hand, does not have the same level of involvement by religion, on either side, really. There is some minor participation, but it's not nearly the same as during the civil rights movement. As far as school shootings are concerned, young people of all kinds are demanding that we pay attention to their safety.

That includes people who are religious and people who are not. They all have the same goal, but religion isn't at the base of the argument. In the civil rights movement, the question was whether black people were equal to white people in their rights and treatment. In the school shooting protests, the question of which children should be protected is not there. There is no division of people in terms of their rights. Religion isn't an issue at all. It is simply young people's lives that are at risk. All young people.

So, the arguments are different. The people are different. The issues are different.

My opinion, of course.

[guillaumeb]

30. The fact that there clearly were such signs, as my post shows, is proof only

that your own personal search was not successful.

[MineralMan]

38. There are religious signs in many places.

I've even seen hateful religious signs displayed at funerals, and carried by very nasty people, to boot. Religious signs at an event do not make that event religious.

Once again, you have tried to make your point of view the only acceptable one. Why do you do that?

[guillaumeb]

41. You made the initial claim.

The claim has been refuted.

And you ended with another curious claim.

[MineralMan]

42. It has not. I did not see any, as I said.

Refute that.

[guillaumeb]

43. You actually made a number of unprovable claims.

And yes, all of these observations are your personal opinion.

[MineralMan]

44. ..

[lindysalsagal]

47. Religion precludes taking responsibility, and foments tribalism.

Just as religious people are more likely to ignore global warming and deny our collective responsibility, they believe in evil and that they must defend against it with guns.

They ascribe to the labelling of everyone as good or bad: and judgement is a central tennet of religion. They ashew science and prefer to see mental illness as incurable, thereby avoiding the need for treatment, doctors or facilities. Prisons thrive in religious cultures.

Shame and guilt play a huge role in gun violence. Religious people lack the will to treat drug addiction.

Sorry, but I see all of this working to perpetuate religion and the civil culture that does little to improve things.

I don't believe guns and religion are seperable.