The Secular and the Sacred 05

Can religion save souls?

2009-05-02T15:41:00.000-07:00

I have always thought that the idea of saving souls and healing through prayer to be pretty irrational. I can't say that I have ever had nearly enough faith in anything to allow myself to believe that religion could save anyone or set anyone on a different track. Nevertheless, many people claim that faith is what brought them through the toughest of situations. People are grateful to god and church in times of distress, violence, sickness and depression. Religious faith has been linked to healing patients of substance abuse, cancer, major surgery including cardiac surgery, suicidal tendencies, and criminal behavior. Although I don't quite understand this phenomena, I cannot deny that it occurs. I only wonder if there is any evidence that proves that prayer and religious faith effects people psychologically. The information that I found while researching doesn't seem to offer any type of scientific proof or explanation, it just supports the argument that religious faith increases the hope that people feel and allows them to remain mentally focused on a positive outcome. I guess sometimes people just need something to believe in. They need to believe in something that goes beyond rational thinking in order to have faith in themselves or to believe that they are going to make it out of whatever hardships are troubling them. According to an article on medscape.com "Faith-based, positive religious resources can help patients recover from cardiac surgery, according to findings from a study presented at the 114th annual convention of the American Psychological Association (APA). The study suggests that enhanced hope and perceived social support can protect psychological well-being during stressful procedures and experiences, whereas having negative religious thoughts and struggles may hinder recovery." This idea very much reinforces the concept of the power of positive thinking. If patients believe that there is a powerful force of good out there trying to help them then they find in much easier to stay positive and strengthen themselves. But is this really attributed to God? Couldn't we find other ways to remain positive in distressful situations without turning to religion? I like to think so, but in a world ridden with pessimistic ideology and money woes I guess there almost needs to be some sort of magic supernatural thought to really inspire someone to stay positive. Reality just doesn't quite cut it.
This video is a quick explanation of how religion effects the brain, and how the feeling of transcendence, which is linked to spiritual healing, can be explained scientifically.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0UqLRdPc24&NR=1

Was Jesus a vegetatian.

2009-05-01T21:12:00.001-07:00

The idea that Jesus was a vegetarian is almost as ignorant as proclaiming that George Bush knew exactly what he was doing in office. Although I’m no scientist when it comes to religion, I am however well versed in the teachings of both protestant and catholic traditions. When I was growing up in the family, religion was an important part of our culture. There are many references in the Bible to the consumption of both bread and fish, which automatically disqualifies any and all of these ridiculous and credulous assumptions. The fact that PeTA encourages this type of thinking should clearly indicate to us that they are unreliable both in their judgment and their philosophies. In my opinion, such a social atrocity of lies and unsustainable evidence to support their idea’s, is much worse a fallacy then to have religion provide a social and cultural role in people’s lives or even serving a political or civic role to society. Groups and organizations such as these actually rob people’s minds of their personal judgment and provide a getaway plan for the conscious theft of our individuality as well as our health.

This video may have a point but i still like to grill my steak outside on a nice summer day. Cheers...

Parody Religions

2009-04-25T12:08:00.000-07:00

So, this whole year we’ve been talking about the major religions like Islam, Judaism, Christianity, Native American beliefs, Buddhism, Hinduism, and a bunch of other ones. But what about Googlism? The Invisible Pink Unicorn? And Pastafarianism? Some of you may be aware of these unheard “parody” religions, but I wanted to look into them a little closer. Most of the religions poke fun at the established religions today like Christianity, but surprisingly they have pretty good points and theories that are just as “correct/ridiculous” as the religions of today.

Googlism is one of my favorites because it outs a few things into perspective This is on the main web page of The Church of Google (which is not affiliated with the actual Google Company of course).

“We at the Church of Google believe the search engine Google is the closest humankind has ever come to directly experiencing an actual God (as typically defined). We believe there is much more evidence in favour of Google's divinity than there is for the divinity of other more traditional gods.”

I took a moment and thought about that quote. To me, that statement seems pretty accurate, especially in these modern times.I look more to google than to God to figure out my problems. I looked further into the website and found they created the “9 Proofs” that show how close Google is to a modern god. A few examples of them are “Google is all knowing, Google is everywhere, and Google answers prayers.” Sound familiar? This is just like the Christian's (or any other major religion's) God, just Google can’t smite you if you do something it doesn’t like. This actually sounds like a pretty good religion to me now that I think of it.
Another one I found pretty intriguing was the Invisible Pink unicorn. According to the belief as explained by Steve Eley:

"The Invisible Pink Unicorns is a being of great spiritual power. We know this because she is capable of being invisible and pink at the same time. Like all religions, the Faith of the Invisible Pink Unicorn is based upon both logic and faith. We have faith that she is pink; we logically know that she is invisible because we can't see her."

It looks silly what the above statement says, but that statement is pretty much based off of any religion out there today. You can’t see a god because he/she/it is invisible, but you can’t prove it doesn’t exist because it isn't visible. Of course these religions aren’t practiced as vigorously as modern religions (at least I don’t think) but they are there just to show that there are some foolish and silly ideas and beliefs of those religions.

Here are a few Parody religions/beliefs if you’re interested:
The Church of Google
The Invisible Pink Unicorn
Pastafarianism (Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster)
Last Thursdayism
Russels Teapot

Media, Morality and Religion

2009-04-24T21:21:00.000-07:00

A topic that I have focused a lot on this semester throughout the readings in this course and that of Capitalism and Democracy is that of the media and its similarities to religion and its corresponding role in affecting morality. Essentially, the technology change in the past decade alone has allowed for a huge increase in the availability of the media essentially-everywhere. We as a society are not so dependent on our cellphones and I-phones, I-pods and X-box's that maybe these new devices are the futures bible. Are our children going to grow up learning morals and ethics essentially handed down throughout generations of Christians in our nation from the bible like its been? I dont think so.
It is truly scary to think about the next generation and the advent affect technology and the media's increasing availability will have on them. I find myself as many of my peers would I believe in the middle, not too old that it takes me 5 min. to send a one word txt, not too young to be liking the crazy new video game systems and games that come with them now. I'm not saying I know exactly where I fit into the generation graph but I do know I'm in the middle of a serious change in how one generation to the next finds itself nurtured by the media. Personally, Im terrified...
Sacred and Secular, symbolic or stupid, satisfied or sadened. I think that one thing I have taken away from this class, and one thing I hope the next generation takes away from the media is that there are always in betweens, everything is always relative, no one is ever truly "right" or "wrong" in an ethical or moral stand point because no one can judge that. There will always be different ways to obtain common ethics and morals known as "good" to a society, and there will always be ways that are viewed as "bad". There will always be parts of the media that corrupt, and parts that triumph in doing good, sharing knowledge and spreading information. Whatever happens happens is the long run in the grand scheme of things, be here now. om.

Religion and Moral Development

2009-04-24T19:25:00.000-07:00

I wanted to share with all of you this theory I came up with while doing the most recent homework assignment (overview of each section of the course).

At some point in the discussion we have mentioned whether or not religion promotes morality or not. As Wolfe claims, "Both morality and religion are far too dynamic for any one-to-one relationship between them to remain stable for any long period of time" (Wolfe 128).

I believe that religion does serve a purpose in spreading morality. Specifically, religion gives a motivation for people who are not yet developed enough to do good for the sake of doing good. This is not to say that religion is only for such people, but that it does provide alternative motivations for obeying moral law. My justification for this stance is as follows:

Lawrence Kohlberg outlined six stages of moral development (check this link):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kohlberg%27s_stages_of_moral_development
Basically broken down into:

Level 1 (Pre-Conventional)
1. Obedience and punishment orientation
(How can I avoid punishment?)
2. Self-interest orientation
(What's in it for me?)

Level 2 (Conventional)
3. Interpersonal accord and conformity
(Social norms)
(The good boy/good girl attitude)
4. Authority and social-order maintaining orientation
(Law and order morality)

Level 3 (Post-Conventional)
5. Social contract orientation
6. Universal ethical principles
(Principled conscience)

A person with stage 4,5, or 6 morality will attempt to seek morality in order to maintain social order, maintain a social contract, or because their sense of universal morality guides them to (respectively). Obviously, nothing about religion is prohibitive of these stages and there is nothing about reaching these stages that would inherently drive a person away from religion.

However, for those majority of the populous who fall into stages 1, 2, or 3 of moral development, religion offers reasons to act within a set of moral boundaries that a person with that level of morality would be unlikely to develop autonomously.

For those at stage 1: "Do what is right or God(s) will punish you!" There is no escaping His (or their) judgement, so the "its only wrong if I get caught" mentality of the Stage 1 person does not apply.

For those at stage 2: "What's in it for you? Salvation! When you die (which is inevitable) you will go to a wonderful place as long as you follow all of the rules right now."

For those at stage 3: "Why should you do it? Because everyone else in the community/society do also." Even if you are on the lower end of the moral totem pole you can still hold yourself up by mimic-ing the superior moral behavior outlined by a figurehead such as Christ, Buddha, or other religious figure.

Thus, I believe that religion can serve as a powerful motivating force for the portions of the population that have not yet developed higher level morality.

Once again I must stress that this does not indicate that religious people are somehow lagged in moral development or anything of the sort. I just wanted to provide a potential explanation for how religion can assist in spreading morality to those who might not otherwise have found it.

For course readings click here:http://secularsacred05.blogspot.com/search/label/course%20texts

Religion & Christian Capitalism in the US

2009-04-24T19:21:00.000-07:00

In light of my previous post, looking at religious spikes in times of woe, and a way to tie these two core courses together here at the end of the semester, the role of capitalism and religion together was on my mind. It's a funny thought that when times are tough, people generally flock to religion when the money goes. However ironically, religion in modern America is deeply ingrained within the capitalist system, focusing a great attention on spending tremendous amounts of money on mainstream material religion, on worthless products for the masses. This consumerist segment of religion stems from commercialism and material culture.

Religion in America alone is greatly part of material culture, marketing products and unfortunately beliefs. Religion is a large profit source in this country, serving to be greatly entwined within the capitalist framework we base our country on. They both work together with this notion of religion and capitalism comprising hand in hand. Also this country bases huge values on religion, and bases its economic foundation on a capitalist system, therefore two huge entities running a country side by side, coincide together to create one material American culture of religious capitalists, to speak very generally.

To further describe this notion that religion integrates well with a capitalist society, Colleen Mcdannell in her text, "Material Christianity" highlights the close interrelation between the two. She states,

"Christian retailing - the selling of Christian goods and services to a buyer for personal or household use - is a significant aspect of contemporary religious life in America. During the early 1990s, the sales of Christian products in bookstores exceeded $3 billion annually!"

The success of the Christian retailing market is undeniable, as religion is fueled by capitalism's framework. Using Christian retailing specifically material Christianity, religion creates a specific culture in America. This culture is a result of the capitalistic system in place governing and working with religion, allowing a place for it. If $3 billion a year doesn't correlate a religious money making market within a strong capitalist structure than I don't know what would!

McDannell continues, "By buying and displaying Christian art in their homes, giving gifts with biblical sayings, or wearing T-shirts, conservative Protestants translate their beliefs into visible messages." This transformation of belief to material items, creates a religious culture based on buying and selling, within a capital driven political system. This notion clearly links the two realms of religion and capitalism, finding a common place between the two in our American society.

For some external input, I found another blog from about.com relating to someones strong atheistic views on materialism in religion, specifically in Christianity in regards to Christmas and other commercialism. The blog is quoted,

"...inherent tension between the evangelical right and the corporate right, both of whom try to live together within the GOP. Pure market capitalism does not respect traditions or religion. Capitalism doesn't care. The market doesn't care. All that matters is how to make the best profit possible from selling to the public" (Cline).

With this is mind, pure capitalism feeds of markets, and the massive market that religion offers is able to provide the economic framework a lot of revenue. Capitalism in our country thrives with religion's markets, and religion thrives more so with the help of a profit driven economic system behind it. Separation of church and state doesn't matter when money is involved, especially when its benefiting the system itself.

Works Cited:

Cline, Austin. "Material Excesses of Christmas are a Moral Problem: Objecting to the Extreme Spending, Borrowing, Materialism." Agnosticism / Atheism - Free Inquiry, Skepticism, Atheism, Religious Philosophy. 25 Apr. 2009.

McDannell, Colleen. Material Christianity: Religion and Popular Culture in America. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1995.

Religion and State

2009-04-24T18:58:00.000-07:00

The idea of religion has been around as long as humans have been walking this earth. The definition of religion is the worship of any superhuman controlling power, often a personal God or gods. What makes religion interesting is how everyone has their own idea what religion means to them. Across the United States, there are people who dedicate every day of their lives to worship and there are people who worship nothing. Because of how diverse our country is, state and religion should never be paired together. A good example of a conflict caused by this can be found in any Amish Commune.

The problem with religion and state is where the state draws the line as to where religion is involved. Children are required to attend school until they're 16. But in Amish communities, it is believed that the youth needs no further schooling beyond 8th grade. As you can see, this can cause many conflicts between the state, the first amendment, and citizens right to freedom of worship.

Technology v. Solitude

2009-04-24T17:50:00.001-07:00

After giving a group presentation in different forms or religion and practice, I’ve spent a little more time thinking about meditation and solitude. As I’ve said in my previous post, I was raised Catholic and quickly lost interest once high school came around. Religion was never really something that made me feel better or put me in touch with myself. Often times it was quite the chore to even get out of bed and attend mass. The thing that’s always been important to me is time for myself. Being able to have an hour or two each day where I can relax, day dream, listen to music, and reflect on my day/week really helps me feel grounded. It also helps control the stress a bit too.

While I work pretty hard to make sure I have this time each day, I feel that our society (specifically Gen Y) is having a lot less alone time as a whole. Technology here is what’s to blame. Everyday I walk around campus and everyone is either on their laptops, PDAs, cell phones, texting, or actually interacting with others. Don’t get me wrong because I definitely participate in all of the above while on campus, but with these technologies it’s becoming harder to actually get away and truly be alone when all someone has to do is send you a text or IM. I really enjoy technology and how much easier it makes life. For example, I’m writing this right now away from my apartment on my laptop while simultaneously texting a friend. Technology allows me to keep my friends and family only a few buttons away no matter where I go. But this constant connectivity makes it hard to really be alone. I found an interesting video on Youtube by Dina Rudick and Scott Helman-

Religious Tolerance

2009-04-24T16:46:00.000-07:00

As we are nearing the end of this course, the questions of religion have just began flowing. If religion is supposed to be something that works as a guideline of how people to live good and decent lives, why is there so much hostility and hatred in the world? With all of these different religions, it is almost impossible for people to agree on their beliefs. I grew up in private catholic schools and have frequently felt like religion was being forced upon me. In no way should this ever happen, your beliefs should be brought about by your own experiences and interpretations of events that have happened. Going back to what Kant said, people should not rely on others for their beliefs and virtues.
I feel if people relied less on religion to tell them what to do, there would not be as much religious intolerance from their beliefs telling them others' are wrong. Religious tolerance is something that should be worked upon much harder globally. Why spend so much time looking at the differences when you should be focusing on the similarities?

have a nice summer

Will Religion Ever Die

2009-04-24T11:10:00.000-07:00

For my final blog post I was thinking about how long different forms of religion have lasted and have continuously been followed over time. This made me wonder whether or not religion as we know it will ever come to a complete stop or if everyone will one day believe in the same thing. Faith is such a strong thing and it made me think, even if someone had scientific proof of how we were created and what was really true, would all people except it or continue to follow what they believe to be true in their religion. On page 109 in The Stillborn God Lilla describes the human curiosity and how it can lead to beliefs in science or religion. This leads me to believe that we will never stop questioning our world and that we will always rely on science or religion for comfort.

A Gathering Storm

2009-04-24T00:17:00.001-07:00

I found this video on youtube, and I DEFININTELY recommend that you all watch this, it's almost too funny.

Enlightenment...My Final Conclusion

2009-04-23T18:16:00.000-07:00

Now that our class is coming to an end for the semester I can’t help but look back on all that I have learned and how it has had its impact on my beliefs. It is obvious to me, as it seems it is with most Americans, that our society has drastically changed over time and is continuing to change. Religion is still a very dominating issue within the United States, but over the years it has taken a new look. There is a greater variety of religions as well as a greater number of people without any religion at all. This class has led me to lean towards the belief of enlightenment and each person having their own understanding of things. Enlightenment seems more and more prevalent in our society, and others, because of the developments in education and societies understanding of the world we live in. Some of our class readings and an article I read online enforced my opinion on this belief and helped me understand where its origins really came from in the United States. I will start by sharing my favorite quote on enlightenment:

“Have the courage to use your own understanding” (Western World 149)

I feel that this quote says a lot about enlightenment and what is needed to allow it. Enlightenment is just the idea of every individual using their own knowledge and intelligence to understand life and everything concerning it. One must have the courage to step out of the pack and general consensus and allow themselves to believe in what they feel is right.

“This enlightenment requires nothing but freedom—and the most innocent of all that may be called “freedom”: freedom to make public use of one’s reason in all matters.” (Western World 150)

Freedom has not always been easy to come by in our world. Now that more freedoms are allowed to individuals in most countries, and especially the U.S, it is acceptable for an individual to believe in whatever they want and share it with others who might share their ideas. It seems that the United States has always been ahead of other countries when it comes to this freedom, and this is with good reason.

“Dr. Wood introduced enlightenment as a primary building block for America as a nation. Early Americans considered themselves pioneers of enlightenment, and they used this self view to establish and define the nation, a first in world history.”(Thomson).

America was founded by free thinking individuals who felt the best way to create a fair and equal nation was to allow freedom of speech, religion, and other beliefs. It seems to me that although we have had our ups and downs with these freedoms our nation was definitely created in a manner which would allow America to be the center of enlightenment and equality.

“Men like Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin were stepping out of the monarchial traditions of their fathers and into a republican ideal in which all men are created equal. The people became citizens – individuals with equal say. Book learning was no longer reserved for the social elite. Eighteenth century Americans believed they have erased the idea of elitism in the first place! Here, according to Dr. Wood, we see the beginnings of the concept of a liberal arts education.”(Thomson).

My conclusion is that enlightenment will only grow as individuals advance in education, acceptance, and understanding of the world we live in, and although there may always be religious institutions, the overall freedom of allowing each person to believe in what they want, and express their beliefs, will become increasingly prevalent. This is now what I believe to be true.

“Eighteenth century America was not the climax of enlightenment. Instead, it served as a unique environment for the construction of a base for continual enlightenment. America's current values are rooted in those established during this time period. The American enlightenment represents the beginning of America's journey toward "true" civilization.”(Thomson).

Works Cited:

The Western World Philosophy. Boston: Pearson Custom Publishing, 2008.

Thomson, Natalie. "American Enlightenment." Summary of a lecture by Gordon S. Wood. University of Maine at Farmington, September 25, 2005. Retrieved April 23, 2009 . .

Christian Rock

2009-04-23T17:34:00.000-07:00

I realize we have already talked about religious music and the impact it can have on people, especially when they go to mass. A mass with great music is a more exciting mass than one with bad music. However, I want to talk about the other form of religious music. The mainstream kind, such as Christian rock. I have listened to a lot of Christian rock in preparation for this post, and if there is one thing I have noticed is how "normal" this music sounds. Seriously, go youtube the bands Red, Pillar, or Skillet and you will see what I am talking about. All there music is incredibly good and sounds just like the music I listen to in my free time (heck it might even be better than my music...really!).

Before I started listening to Christian rock I had a sense of what it was going to sound like. Some guy singing about god and Jesus with a "cool" sounding guitar riff in the background. This is just not true (it may be for the crap Christian rock bands) the lyrics are actually quite good dealing with mortality and love and things like that and not just about god and Jesus.

Alan Wolfe states in The Transformation of American Religion " Rock music-or,as it is frequently called, contemporary Christian music-is now a featured part of Sunday services at evangelical churches throughout the United States" (Wofle 28). Wolfe here calls the music we hear in church the Christian rock. But the thing is that the music you hear in church is nothing like these real Christian rock bands.

After I got recognized to the real Christian rock I started to wonder why I had this misconception about the music. Was it because I just wasn't aware of how the music really was and I was using church as my jumping off point to guess. Or was it because I was thinking all Christian rock bands would be singing really "lame" music because they are religious.

I also learned that a lot of world famous bands first started off as Christian rock bands before they made the jump to real mainstream music. Jessica Simpson first started her career trying to be a Christian rock artist, way before she hit the big time.

Could this then relate to how we perceive other religions? I think that may be a real possibility. We have all these conceptions about things we don't understand. If we don't understand what something is really like we tend to think of it in a real stereotypical manner. This only hurts ourselves because then we don't get to experience and learn things from these things we don't understand.

After learning this I can't help but feel a little stupid. Why would I think something about Christian rock and not even give it a chance before? Were my feelings just too strong to overcome that I just assumed no matter what the band is, if it is Christian rock it has got to suck. Well now I know the truth, and I urge all of you to see it too.

Citation:

Wolfe, Alan. The Transformation of American Religion. New York: Free Press, 2003. Print.

Religion and Sports

2009-04-22T07:54:00.000-07:00

Religion plays an enormous role in professional sports throughout the world today; most notably football players in the NFL are the most public and open about their faith. In a recent MSNBC segment they discuss up how football players publicly display their faith on the field by praying on the field after a game or by end zone blessings and if it is a problem. The video starts with a clip of Terrell Owens telling the media that he is going to play in the super bowl despite an injured leg and against doctors advice, Owens replied “I got the best doctor of all, and that’s god” when asked who cleared him to play. They then interviewed Kurt Warner who is a popular NFL quarterback and one of the most religious athletes in America today. Kurt explained that being religious on the field is no different than when he is religious at home with his wife and kids, it is just a part of who he is and doesn’t feel like there should be any regulation over religious celebrations.

After watching this video clip I also wondered if athletes like Terrell Owens and Kurt Warner would be as religious as they are now if they were not as gifted at sports as they are. I do not know much about how they were raised by their parents or the area in which they grew up. I do know many people who were raised to be extremely religious and lived in a religious community who grew up to be ordinary people who do not live very religious lives. It’s almost like the opposite of Michael Brooks’ article Born Believers; in the article he says how people create god when they are in fear. In this situation these athletes are creating god for being so successful.

Video

http://video.msn.com/video.aspx?mkt=en-us&vid=3af8575b-c30f-4b8e-a1cd-adc0f76f50ee

Works Cited

Brooks, Michael. "Born believers: How Your Brain creates God."New Scientist. February 4, 2009.

Reagan, Ron, and Monica Crowley. Religion and Sports. MSNBC. 4 Feb. 2005

Adam Carolla vs. Religion

2009-04-21T04:54:00.000-07:00

In this radio clip Adam Carolla discusses how he believes religion is foolish and stupid. He continues to argue and gives his reasoning; first he says how he does not agree with all of the religious requirements that people have to follow, he gives the example of Muslims who have to dress in robes and pray five times a day. Adam goes on to give more examples of how religion is foolish and wrong; however he then talks about how sports can be like religion which I would have to agree with. Many Americans today worship and idolize sports teams and athletes. Many religious people have crucifixes, mezuzah, etc in their home while many people who worship sports team will have team colors, posters, and so on. In a religion many people who all believe in the same beliefs come together and practice those beliefs, in sports people come together to watch their team play whether it be at a bar, a friend’s house or the actual stadium. Over the course of history countless people have died fighting for their religion. If you have ever been to a Red Sox Yankees game you would know that just like religion fights and battles between the two sides occur and tragically people are seriously injured and killed. Adam Carolla also talks about how religion can be passed down through family, just like sports teams. Growing up my family was die hard Red Sox fans and practiced Judaism and because of them I now consider myself a diehard Red Sox fan and a Jew. While Sports teams cannot answer the question to god but they do give many people a sense of hope and can bring communities together.

Carolla, Adam. "Adam Carolla." Adam Carolla with Teresa Strasser. KLSX. Los Angeles. 5 Mar. 2008.

Going Home for Easter

2009-04-20T21:05:00.000-07:00

Going home for Easter Sunday this year was a bit different for me. The day started as usual with Mass. After that, we visited my grandfather's grave in the local cemetery, which we've been doing every holiday since his passing. At this point we deviated from what I we used to do when I was younger. We used to travel an hour to Ludlow, MA to visit my grandmother's sister and her family, on my dad's side. It was enjoyable. We ate traditional Polish food and the past few times, had an Easter Egg hunt with her granddaughter. This year, however, we stayed closer to home, having an early dinner at my other grandparents' house.

This was very strange for me. I grew up doing one thing and now that I have grown up, a family tradition has changed. Family traditions come and go, but religious ones seem to be going more than coming these days. I know it may not be true for all families, but it is with mine and in others I have seen. This hits me especially hard being here at college while all this is going on.

This goes back to our discussion at the beginning of the semester when we talked about traditions that we each have. I believe that as we grow older, some of those traditions have to change and others may disappear entirely. But when we strike out on our own and have a family that we need to care for, some of those old traditions will come back in our households and will become a reminder to us of how we were raised.

Scientific look at Religion

2009-04-20T19:46:00.000-07:00

I should first say that if someone already talked about this, I sincerely apologize. My brain doesn’t have the capacity to remember all the blog posts that have already been posted, and I don't have the time to go back and look.

After thinking all day about what I should write about, I decided to crack open Linden’s The Accidental Mind and see what he had to say about religion. I thought it might be interesting to get some scientific thoughts into the class. I opened to the chapter titled “religious impulse” and began to read. I found that he noticed that all cultures in the world have different religions, but are all similar in the fact that they practice a religion. He then poses the question “Why does every human culture have religion?”

Somehow, he is able to explain this in a way that I understand (I'm pretty sure), and hopefully I can relay this to you in a way you can understand. He first discusses how your brain can make things appear to be “gap-free.” His first example is about saccades. Saccades are the jumps and jerks of your eyes as you scan a visual scene. You don’t actually see those jerks, but everything blends very smoothly because you brain is basically making up the visual feedback between each jerk. Hopefully you’re still with me. This shows that your brain can make things up for you, in order for things to make sense.

He then goes on to say the same concept happens with split-brain patients. He gives an example of a patient who is set up in front of a device where they can see two images next to each other, a chicken claw and snow. The subject is asked to select two cards out of several different ones that would best match the individual pictures on the devise. The subject decides to pick a shovel and chicken. As you can see, the subject chose to match the shovel with the snow, and the chicken claw with the chicken. However, when the subject is asked about why they decided on those, the subject states “The chicken claw goes with the chicken and you need a shovel to clean out the chicken shed.” Because there is no clear link between the two hemispheres in a split brain patient, a side of the brain that can clearly see the snow was able to tell the body to pick the shovel card, but was not able to relay this to the other side of the brain, which is supposed to allow the subject to explain themselves in the decision (but it couldn’t). The brain is able to re-organize what happened, and create something that made sense.

(You might be starting to recall all this from last year.)

If you can see where I’m getting at, or actually what he’s getting at, you’ll notice that the brain likes to try and make things make sense. He states “The binding together of disparate percepts and ideas to create coherent narrative that violates our everyday waking experience and cognitive categories is a left cortical function that underlies both dreaming and the creation and social propagation of religious thought.” I’m pretty sure that the statement means that for something that can’t be explained in a way for someone to understand, the brain will make something up, to allow for the person to understand that explanation. This results in unnatural answers to these questions, with “unnatural” referring to something that is “God-like”, which would explain why so many cultures will have some sort of religion.

So, what do you think? Could this be the reason why cultures have religion? Is this the reason behind any religious thoughts? And don’t think of this concept as a scientific fact, he states in the beginning of the chapter that it is all speculation. But who knows? This is probably the reason why I keep on thinking that God had a part in creating life, because scientifically the creation of life it is too difficult to wrap my head around.

Works Cited:

Linden, David J. The Accidental Mind. Cambridge, MA: Belknap, 2007.

Course texts

Religion and Interpretation

2009-04-20T19:23:00.000-07:00

The more I think about religion, and the more I learn about religion, I realize that there is no way of ever being sure of anything, except for what you believe in. Religion does not, in my opinion, shape your beliefs, but rather the other way around. There are thousands of different religions in this world, and no matter what you believe in, you can find a religion that you can associate yourself with, or find the followers to create your own. With that said, I do believe that Christianity is the most successful religion, but not because I personally follow it, or I feel it is right or wrong, but rather because it is the most vague. Christianity has left itself the most gray area, and therefore is much easier for people to associate with, because they can bend the rules and interpret the Bible to mean pretty much anything they want.

An example of just creating a religion to bend to your own beliefs is seen in this video on Eddie Izzard’s take on religion:

Can Prayer Heal?

2009-04-20T15:25:00.000-07:00

Last class reminded me of a very important part of religion. Can the power of prayer heal, or does it at all relate to a person's health? A lot of people think prayer can heal us from any illness, especially the people that have witnessed or experienced a miracle first hand. Just because we can't explain medically, what happens all the time, does that mean if you are magically healed it was because the power of prayer healed you?

There have been many studies on this question. Duke University associate professor of medicine Dr. Harold Koenig has been studying if prayer and/or religion plays a key role in a person's health, or if it somehow relates miracle healing.

"They're less likely to smoke, to drink, to drink and drive," he says. In fact, people who pray tend to get sick less often, as separate studies conducted at Duke, Dartmouth, and Yale universities show. Some statistics from these studies:

Hospitalized people who never attended church have an average stay of three times longer than people who attended regularly.
Heart patients were 14 times more likely to die following surgery if they did not participate in a religion.
Elderly people who never or rarely attended church had a stroke rate double that of people who attended regularly.
In Israel, religious people had a 40% lower death rate from cardiovascular disease and cancer."

http://www.webmd.com/balance/features/can-prayer-heal?page=2

How can these studies be explained? Is it just the fact that people who are religious live healthier lives than people who don't practice any religion? Or does the power of prayer have some affect on these people? Some people who become magically healed believe prayer and/or god had some role to play in it.

Robert, for example, believes people's prayers healed his condition. Nothing medically can explain how this happened, but does that mean prayer had anything to do with it? Personally I don't believe prayer can help heal somebody. Just because we don't understand how someone magically heals doesn't mean prayer had anything to do with it.

Studies have shown that people with religion live longer though, how do we explain this. Well according to these studies religious people stress out a lot less often than people who don't practice religion. Stress definitely has a big impact on our health. So maybe religion plays a role in our overall health, but I don't think that means religion can give us miracles. We just can't explain the real reasons for these miraculous healings.

After all if we could explain everything in our world, would religion even exist?

Works Cited

Davis, Jeanie L. "Can Prayer Heal?" 26 Mar. 2004. WebMD. 20 Apr. 2009 .

Is Religion Really A Bad Thing? A Response to "The Real Scandel of Religion"

2009-04-20T12:27:00.000-07:00

Rather than simply commenting on Jasmine's blog post, I felt that what I had to say would be large enough to create a separate post entirely.

" 'It is very difficult to understand how those who worship a man on a cross could help to drive the bloody nails themselves.' - Copyright 2009, Washington Post Writers Group

The article basically talks about how many religious people are able to commit terrible murders, and yet they are people of god. And it doesn’t just talk about terrible crimes like what Hitler did; it also talks about how religious people do things like save themselves instead of helping others."

There is one major flaw that I see in the argument that it is difficult to understand why religious people commit such violent acts and are still people of God. If you remember Dan Merrill's post about the myth of pure evil, you should see that it's obvious that these religious fanatics are not seeing their acts as unjustified. They see their acts as the right thing to do. They are deluded into thinking they are acting for the greater good.

"Moral Idealism
- Good vs. Evil (your violence is a means to a moral end)
- The ends justify the means"

Now you may be thinking, "so religion is the cause of these people thinking this way and acting violently" to which I say that there are always people who take something good and twist it around. Medicine is a good example. Take the technology that is being used to treat patients. Drugs. These drugs that are good in the right cases can be misused. Governments can use the chemicals during wars as attacks on enemy soldiers or civilians.

"I realize that most people that do commit crimes or murder people are religious to begin with. It also makes me wonder, is religion really necessary on this planet? I’m sure we could live without it."

Religion has caused some people to commit acts of violence, this is true. Hindsight is twenty-twenty as the saying goes. But don't let the violence get in the way of looking at the good things religion has done. It has given countless people new directions in their lives when their current paths may have led to destruction or violence. So before you go and say your sure that we could live without religion, think about the good things religion has done. Not only that, think about human nature and the way the brain usually works.

The brain makes up stories. Many believe this is the reason why man has created a God or gods and other spiritual stories. Would it really make sense to try and fight the natural tendency of the brain to come up with explanations? There are many stories of religion giving people hope to live or peace with the idea of passing on. Would you think to take away a pleasant thought from a dying man or woman? I believe that religion is not only necessary in this world, but I think that it is only human nature to want to believe in something bigger than we are. Think about it. If you were bedridden in a hospital bed and the doctor came in and gave you 2 months to live due to an incurable disease, what would be more comforting. The idea that you are about to die...and that's it? Or the idea that you are about to die, but you at least have something to look forward to? Not all is lost.

I guess the question that I have this week is: Would rather know that you'll be dead in the ground, or believe that there may be some kind of existence after death?

Rise in Divorce Rates

2009-04-19T08:37:00.000-07:00

For my third and final blog post I decided to talk about my powerpoint project and the topic of Divorce. This topic relates to a lot of what we have been talking about throughout the entire semester. We have been discussing how religion has become less and less important to our society and how it is viewed differently now than it was in the past. Divorce falls into the same category. From my research, I discovered that divorce was unheard of 100 years ago and it was something that hardly anyone ever did. During this time period religion played an important role in people's lives. In one article titled, "Catholic Conceptions of Faith: A Generational Analysis" the author discusses how children during this time grew up being taught that the Catholic Church was the "one true church".

These children were raised in Catholic schools with priests and nuns who taught them by the bible. The bible states, . Divorce is prohibited if the husband accuses his wife of not being a virgin (Deuteronomy 22: 13-15), Divorce is treacherous behavior (Melachi 2:14), God hates divorce (Malachi 2:16). As well as, Separation is allowed but not divorce (Matthew 19:9), and No divorce on any grounds (Luke 16:18). Which is why the divorce rates were so low during that time.

Now, divorce rates are the highest ever and one study shows that 50% of marriages will end in divorce. "One of the reasons why the material dimension of American religious life is not taken seriously is because of how we describe the nature of religion. A dichotomy has been established between the sacred and the profane, spirit and matter, piety and commerce that constrains our ability to understand how religion works in the real world" (McDannell). A lot of the reasons for the rise in divorce rates is because of the lack of religious values. Our society has stopped putting such an emphasis on religion and religious values.

Works Cited

McDannell, Colleen. Material Christianity: Religion and Popular Culture in America. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1995.

Robinson, B. "Divorce and Remarriage." Religious Tolerance. 5 Feb. 2006. Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance. 7 Apr. 2009 .

Williams, Andrea. "Catholic Conceptions of Faith: A Generational Analysis." Sociology of Religion 57 (1996): 273-89. JSTOR. Champlain College, Burlington. 5 Apr. 2009 .

Golf and God

2009-04-17T09:24:00.000-07:00

Golf has been an enormous part of my life; it has helped make me the person who I am today. Over the years I have learned many life lessons and other valuable pieces of information while on the course. Growing up my parents raised me to be Jewish; we went to temple twice a week until I was a junior in high school and had a bar mitzvah. My parents really pushed religion on both my brother and I, if we did anything wrong my mom would say it’s because we’re not religious enough. Events like these pushed me away from religion and my belief in god, until I step on the golf course.

Many golfers pray to a higher being or the “golf gods” for wisdom and guidance on the course. The majority like myself is not super religious off the course, but there’s something about the game of golf that drives people crazy enough to pray and worship the gods. In the Michael Brooks article Born Believers: How your brain creates god, he discusses why people believe in god. After looking at his article I thought of myself on the golf course and thought about why certain events take place. I can remember countless times where I have hit perfect shots but something out of the ordinary will occur like a ball ending up hitting a shovel that was left behind or having an animal come move a ball or even just how the wind will pick up whiel my ball is in the air.

Over the years the connection between golf and religion has been made and many people have commented over the situation:

"The only time my prayers are never answered is on the golf course." - Billy Graham (Guru)

"Some of us worship in churches, some in synagogues, and some on the golf course." - Adlai Stevenson (Guru)

"If you're caught on a golf course during a storm and are afraid of lightening, hold up a one iron. Not even God can hit a one-iron." - Lee Trevino (Guru)

"If I'm on the golf course and lightening starts, I get inside fast. If God wants to play through, I let him." - Bob Hope (Guru)

"I never pray to God to make a putt. I pray to God to help me react good if I miss a putt." - Chi Chi Rodriguez (Guru)

"If you call on God to improve the results of a shot while it is still in motion, you are using an 'outside agency' and subject to appropriate penalties under the rules of golf." - Henry Longhurst(Guru)

Works Cited:

Guru, The Golf. "Golf and Religion: Quotes on God and Golf." HubPages. 14 Apr. 2009 .

Brooks, Michael. "Born believers: How Your Brain creates God."New Scientist. February 4, 2009.

Teens and Religion

2009-04-17T05:06:00.000-07:00

While I was reading through the last chapter of Material Christianity I was caught by one small section that talked about teens and their faith.

"Teenagers can wear T-shirts to witness to Christianity's importance in their lives even if they can only awkwardly articulate their feelings."

This caught me because I was one of those teens not too long ago. I can remember participating in church, sunday school classes, and youth groups with the church. I was a heavily committed in the Christian faith, I knew that for some reason it was important for me to follow the religion. I guess you could say that the promise of eternal life, free donuts after service, and happy parents played a large role in why I continued to follow God. It seems that I was not the only one just trying to please my parents, according to the National Study of Youth and Religion ,"religion really does matter to teens". In a study 71% of teens in a telephone survey said that they were in some degree close to god. One thing I can remember is Soul Fest. Its a Contemporary Christian music festival that spans over 4 or 5 days. Hundreds of people flock to this event annually every summer. The music spans just about any genre you can think of. The popularization of this music is what kept helped me keep my faith, even some of my non-Christian friends thought the music was enjoyable. By this point I was so into the religion that my faith was mostly built out of the faith of others. I was only 15 years old and I didn't want to pick up the bible and structure my faith out of words I could barely understand, I could just go on with my parents knowledge, my popular Christian music, and my friends at church who barely conversed amongst one another about anything religious. It was easy to be Christian, wait, it was easy to be labeled a Christian and provide no explaination. And even easier if you had a "Jesus is My Homeboy" t-shirt. My question to you is, if religion wasn't stressed by older generations to the youth do you think its popular culture would exist?

McDannell, Colleen. Material Christianity Religion and Popular Culture in America. New York: Yale UP, 1998.

"Study: Teens serious about religion - U.S. news- msnbc.com." Breaking News, Weather, Business, Health, Entertainment, Sports, Politics, Travel, Science, Technology, Local, US & World News- msnbc.com. 17 Apr. 2009 .

Religion and the Economy a la Steve Colbert

2009-04-16T18:24:00.000-07:00

Here is an interesting and entertaining clip that highlights some of the connections between the Secular and the Sacred and Capitalism and Democracy.

The Colbert Report

Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c

Turning to Religion - Jim Martin

colbertnation.com

Colbert Report Full Episodes

Political Humor

NASA Name Contest

Texting God

2009-04-14T05:39:00.000-07:00

For those of you not familiar with the basic Christian calendar, this past Sunday was Easter Sunday, supposedly the time when Jesus rose from the dead. Easter has always been a big deal in my family because my mother’s parents view it as a great time to get everyone together and have a big breakfast, followed by the entire family going to church. I’m a very non-religious person, but I knew that this meant a lot to my mom so I toughed it out.

As with every year, the family breakfast was nothing too special, but I could tell my grandparents enjoyed having all of their children there with them, including most of their grandchildren. With that being said, the big family breakfast has never been what I didn’t like about Easter Sunday, and that didn’t change this year.

This year, church was a difference experience, and it really made me wonder what religion is becoming, and why people really do what they do. This year at church, I ended up sitting between my grandfather and my mother, but most importantly there was a pair of middle-aged women sitting in the row in front of us, who at first glance looked extremely focused on the service, and were kind of nodding along with what the minister was saying. I then realized that this was far from the truth, and they were actually texting each other.

This really made me wonder how that could have happened. Coming from the texting generation, where we never go anywhere without our cell phones, I know that there church is one of the few places where I wouldn’t even think of texting. So there I am, sitting there, watching people my mother’s age texting back and forth and giggling like teenagers. When did they ever think this was ok? Sadly, this was not the most disheartening or mind-boggling event during church that morning.

After the women in front of me put me in a fairly cynical mood, my mom turned to me during one of the hymns and asked me “Why do you never sing?” I’ve thought about this question for years, and I just never saw the point of singing in church, so I decided that now would be a good time, and responded to her question with “Well, why do you?”

She didn’t have an answer. I spent the rest of the service wondering how many people were in the building, and how many people were actually paying attention, and in general why they were here. Why do we sing in church? I understand the role of the choir, but why is it that everyone is supposed to sing certain songs, and that if you choose not to sing, you are viewed as different, or wrong, even though half of the people singing are only doing so because they think that it is what they are supposed to do?

"The Real Scandal of Religion"

2009-04-13T21:37:00.000-07:00

I decided to read an article about religion and comment on it...

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/02/the_real_scandal_of_religion.html

"It is very difficult to understand how those who worship a man on a cross could help to drive the bloody nails themselves." - Copyright 2009, Washington Post Writers Group

The article basically talks about how many religious people are able to commit terrible murders, and yet they are people of god. And it doesn’t just talk about terrible crimes like what Hitler did; it also talks about how religious people do things like save themselves instead of helping others. The articles main points are with Hitler and how two thirds of the votes were passed by the most popular religion in Germany at the time; Christianity. While I was growing up I couldn’t understand how religious people could really be bad, but now I realize that most people that do commit crimes or murder people are religious to begin with. It also makes me wonder, is religion really necessary on this planet? I’m sure we could live without it. (no video sorry)

The Choices We Make

2009-04-13T20:24:00.000-07:00

Over the course of this year, in this class and in others, I have learned many things about both people and religion. But the one question that has yet to be answered is not a simple one. My question is “this if god exists does he directly influence the path that we take in life or are the choices we make our own”. There are several different theories from several different experts. Personally I believe that god simply made us and left us to fill in the blanks. After all the evil and depraved things that I have learned about this year make me wonder is a supreme being controlling the world today? If you doubt about the evils in our world today than just watch the video I posted about Albert Fish.

According to Lilla “God does not let us be…he is our creator, our guide our judge, our redeemer. And because he is, we must know how he wants us to live.” There are others who believe that there is no go and we are simply shaped by our surroundings. The French novelist and essayist Simone de Beauvoir said “It's frightening to think that you mark your children merely by being yourself. It seems unfair. You can't assume the responsibility for everything you do, or don't do”. Everyone has their own opinion in this subject for different reasons. Here’s Director Taylor Hackford’s thought on the subject. In this scene Keanu Reeves’ character discovers the true about his boss Al Pacino….
Lilla, Mark. The Stillborn God: Religion, Politics, and the Modern West. New York: Vintage
Books, 2008.

Come on Jesus, big money big money...

2009-04-13T20:04:00.001-07:00

When it really gets down to the nitty gritty, I am sure that we can all agree that our economy isn't doing all that well. Yes we have stimulus plans, bail-outs, etc, but things aren't going to be getting better for a really long time, at least not without a miracle. Oh wait, they have a thing for that now, it's called organized religion. You heard me right, people are so "desperate" these days that they are turning to their respective religions and dieties and asking them for economic advice.
Personally, I thought that attributing economic well-being to the power of the gods was something that we grew out of centuries ago, so much for that. In the Monday's edition of the New York Times online, there was an article speaking to a similar affect. The quotation, "Apparently Christians Against Poverty have 3,500 new referrals every day, " caught me of gaurd to say the very least. It's as if we are avoiding directly dealing with or otherwise associating ourselves with this economic crash, so we turn to god for answers.
I got to thinking about what might actually go on that a meeting for the Christians Against Poverty. Would they meet as a regular mass might, except they would pray for advice as to best protect their 401k's? Would they flagelate themselves for every point that their most valued stocks and holdings dropped? It turns out, they serve more as a service, as a means of acting through the lord, so as to provide you with the best financial and economic advice there is. The whole thing seems a little foolish to me, but I am sure that there are some people out there who can more than justify these actions. My only comfort in this arguement is that the universe tends to unfold as it should, and if these people want to put their funds in the hands of an imaginary friend, a thousand-year-old jewish zombie, a 3rd person omnicient, or a really old guy in funny robes, be my guest.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/5146664/People-turning-to-religion-for-economic-advice.html

p.s. this video is just in the realm of crazy christian zealots, and thought it might be interesting to watch, especially with same-sex marriage being legalized recently.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ED4DJbCDthI

Picking a Religion

2009-04-13T19:23:00.000-07:00

During this semester we have talked mostly in class about how people are mostly religious or not and what the difference between the secular and sacred lifestyles. I thought it would be interesting to see how many people go out and pick their religions based on what the religion offers.

It seems that most of the time people are raised with a specific religion in the household that he or she has grown up in. However, I know personally that when I was going through high school I disagreed with the majority of teachings that I had learned in my childhood youth. It seemed as if I needed to find something that fitted my lifestyle, having a religion custom fitted to my needs.

I'm not sure if everyone else has gone through this process, however I found this video that made me laugh and was exactly how I was picturing the process....

I was wondering if anyone else went though this same process or not. Thanks!

"The Great Unthinking Mass" aka USA

2009-04-10T05:26:00.000-07:00

Just recently we completed a worksheet on our reading. One of these readings was Immanuel Kant's "An Answer to the Question: What is Enlightenment?" This was a response to the question posed by Prussian official Reverend Johann Friedrich Zollner a year before this essay.
This essay by Kant explains that people do not achieve enlightenment not because they lack intellegence but because they lack the courage to work off their own intellect without the guidance of another. Kant says, “Enlightenment is man’s emergence from his self-incurred immaturity. This immaturity is self-imposed when its cause lies not in lack of understanding, but in lack of resolve and courage to use it without guidance from another. Sapere Aude!" (Dare to know) (Kant)

Dare to know is Kant's motto for enlightenment. He continues on this subject and explains that many don't attain enlightenment because of laziness and because they have become too fond of their state of not thinking for themselves. Not thinking for yourself in todays society is very easy with all the rules, regulations, and people to tell you what to do. He uses the example of the guardians explaining how straying away from these regulations alone is dangerous, Kant feels differently. He felt that the people struggling for enlightenment would fall a few times, but learn how to walk after a couple tries. The idea of falling usually keeps the timid and immature from trying again, never learning how to walk.

Kant felt a huge part of this enlightenment was the separation of church and state. If the church is kept out of stately affairs it may be easier for people to stop relying on their guardians to make their decisions for them. If there was no church impeding on people's lives and thinking, there is no telling what new ideas could have come about.

If people in our society today actually thought for themselves instead of listening to everything the media, the government, and churches had to say, we may have a more mature nation. In the past there has been many horrible catastrophes just because the people following orders didn't think with their own intellect. The Holocaust is an example for this, had the Nazi soldiers listened to their own knowledge and not take orders from above, things could have been drastically different.

As I look back into my own past, I remember events that would have played out for the better had I not followed others and relied on my own knowledge. Has there been a time where you feel you should have used the courage to follow your own intellect?
Is our society really at the maturity level we want? How far has our society set itself back from being enlightened?

Do we have the power?

2009-04-09T05:51:00.000-07:00

I saw an extremely interesting video in Film Theory that I have put a link to below. It discusses existentialism; a theory that I subscribe to. I believe the points raised in the video would make for a very interesting class discussion.

Atheist Videos

2009-04-08T08:18:00.001-07:00

When browsing youtube.com for some videos that may inspire discussion, I found a Fox news clip mocking atheist ads posted on buses. I found this an excellent opportunity to mock fox news back, and show their supreme conservative agendas in terms of broadcasting news totally biased.

Watch Fox News attempt to show "fair and unbiased" news:

Traditions of the Catholic Religion

2009-04-06T16:24:00.000-07:00

While watching television, I came across many episodes of my favorite shows that relate to religion and the traditions of being Catholic. This caused me to think about how religion is viewed in the 21st century and what it really means to be a Catholic. The Catholic religion bases itself on traditions and what practitioners are "supposed" to do in order to consider themselves a true Catholic. Growing up, I considered myself Catholic because that is what my family raised me as. When I think more about my religious views though, I wonder if I am still considered a Catholic because I never participate in the traditions Catholics should be doing. I do not go to church anymore, I do not pray to God, I do not attend confession, etc.

This made me think back to a quote from The Transformation of American Religion, "Historian Robert Orsi has written of the "intense devotional creativity and improvisation in American Catholic culture" that characterized the religious life of his parent's generation, but in today's world, one study found that 61 percent of religiously active Catholics never pray with a rosary, 76 percent never engage in the novena (nine consecutive evenings of prayer), 44 percent never participate in the Stations of the Cross, and 53 percent never attend Benediction" (Wolfe).

This all relates back to an episode of That 70s Show that was on TV the other day where Eric's mom asked him and his sister to attend church with her, but they listed off reasons why they did not want to go.

This video shows how being a Catholic has changed over time. There is a clear seperation between Eric and his mom and how they view the Catholic Religion.

This blog post is meant to bring up the question of what it means to be a true Catholic. Must people follow the many traditions of this religion in order to be considered a true and devote Catholic or has the value of being a Catholic and the traditions changed so much over time that it solely depends on the individual and how they choose to practice?

WORKS CITED

Wolfe, Alan. The Transformation of American Religion: How We Actually Live Our Faith. New York: Free Press, 2003.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HgprmIdnGmQ (Youtube video)

Faith Vs. Fanaticism Formal blog post

2009-04-03T07:50:00.000-07:00

In class a couple weeks ago we had a discussion on religious fanaticism. It got me thinking, where exactly do we draw the line between faith and fanaticism? What are the boundaries that have to be crossed in order to be considered a fanatic?
In my personal opinion it comes down to simply defining the terms. Faith is defined as: a belief that is not based on proof (dictionary.com). To me what makes someone faithful instead of a fanatic is that they will admit that they believe something, but do not know it, and cannot prove that it is true. When someone expresses their religious beliefs in this way it is less offensive and easier to accept. A person who has religious faith may “think” that they know the truth, but they do not try and force what they believe to be the truth onto others as if there were no other possibilities.
A fanatic is someone who shows aggressive and overweening devotion to a cause or belief (dictionary.com). Or you could choose to agree with the definition provided by urbandictionary.com of a religious fanatic, it is slightly less accurate, but slightly more amusing.
A religious fanatic would not use the words personal belief, or I think, they would be all up in your face with I know and you don’t. They would have an attitude that they know better than anyone who does not share their faith. The whole idea of saving souls was created by religious fanatics who fear others who do not share the same devotion to religion.
Here are some fun examples of religious fanaticism. Also, whenever you get the chance, check out the site for Landover Baptist Church. It is a completely fictional church that was created as a satire, poking fun an religious fanaticism and the commercial side of Christianity.

Athiest Cartoon

2009-04-03T07:01:00.000-07:00

So the other night, I was utilizing the oh so wonderful StumbleUpon tool for Firefox and seeing all that the internet had to show me. I had told the tool that I was an atheist at an earlier date, and now almost every time I log in, it shows me a new form of "atheist" cartoon. I thought that the blog would be the best place to share this with the class so as to analyze it as fully as possible.

http://www.atheistcartoons.com/?p=288

Religion and Politics, Good Friends.

2009-04-02T19:11:00.000-07:00

First, I have to apologize-I' am going to steal Corey's quote...Sorry but I swear I was going to use it and dont worry because I took another angle with it.
While I was reading in Lilla, I came across a quote that stopped me. It just somehow seemed to go along so well with all the heat over the G-20 summit and the protesting going on. “However fraught with discord and even violence is the relation between a nation’s religion and political authority at any particular time, a deeper, more complex reconciliation between them is being worked out in the process.” (Lilla 184) The anarchists in London, with a difference in religion between basically all nations represented keep in mind, were protesting capitalism; and essentially it turned violent. I think that the message of this quote is that although there are differences within religion, political or nationalistic views, while disputing we somehow come closer together and closer to unification...
Either way,I hope that something deeper is being formed here by this meeting and protesting, not just the question of: "What can we do to be rich again?" Yet, doesn't it seems like such an odd concept that these 20 "world leaders" come together and suposidly are going to be able to determine what is going to make things "okay." Doesn't the fact that our whole world economy is failing ring some bells? Maybe this capitalism thing isnt such a good idea after-all? Thats not going so far as to say that anarchism is the way to go, but seriously- lets learn something here suposid world leaders... Having a meeting with 20 people trying to talk about world economy when there are 195 countries in the world is absurd, ludacris and really a slap in so many developing countries faces.
I feel as though it is time we stopped worrying so much about how we are going to get ourselves out of this economic rut when we have more pressing issue's to focus on. Global warming? World hunger? Granted one thing I keep hearing now is more money to the IMF so that developing countries can receive more loans, but is that really solving the problem? The problem with a lot of developing countries is that they are already in a mountain of debt from IMF loans; I think it is time something more drastic was done, not 20 people of the richest countries in the world trying not to have their country become like a developing one. Take Haiti for example, can you imagine living on $1,400 for a whole year? A little more than 100 a month? I mean, I will be the first to admit I spend some days over a hundred dollars, and I know I'm not alone...
All in all, Lilla and this quote better be right. A "more complex reconciliation" better be on the way for all of us, anarchists, Americans, Christians, Haitians. Or else everyone is really in trouble.

Religious Neurosis?

2009-04-02T17:25:00.000-07:00

"The general idea of Christ the redeemer belongs to the world wide and pre-Christ theme of the hero and rescuer who, although he has been devoured by a monster, appears again in a miraculous way, having overcome whatever monster it was that swallowed him. When and where such a motif originated nobody knows. We do not even know how to go about investigating the problem. The one apparent certainty is that every generation seems to have known it as a tradition handed down from some preceding time. Thus we can safely assume that it originated at a period when man did not yet know that he possessed a hero myth; in an age, that is to say, when he did not yet consciously reflect on what he was saying. The hero figure is an archetype, which has existed in time immemorial." This idea has been presented by Carl Jung in his book Man and His Symbols.

In contemporary times, this idea explains the nature of why humans create religions. Jung proposes that ideas of Gods and "God-men" are inherent in the human unconscious. We do not create the ideas of Gods or mystical beings, rather our unconscious creates them for us in order to keep our minds stable, and avoid neurosis. It is a necessary part of human existence. Before we had the ability to intellectualize and conceive things on a conscious level, homage was paid to these unconscious figures purely out of instinct. In our current age of intellectual thought however, many people ignore their unconscious and their natural instincts.

In the times of ancient Egypt, people did not try to rationalize why they made sacrifices to their many gods, they just did because it helped them with their daily processes and relieved anxiety. They had ideas of the Hero, like Jesus, in the form of the Osiris-Horus myth, which is a direct parallel to the idea of Christ the Redeemer. The people who followed the Catholic Church for the many years during the dark ages never questioned their beliefs in the way we do now, but again, practiced rituals, like confession and prayer, to aid in their daily lives.

In the age of scientific thought, many of the unconscious elaborations of spirituality and the existence of archetypal themes are forgotten. This leads to neurotic thought, and instability of the human psyche.

The first five minutes of this clip from the film Zeitgeist elaborates on the many themes of religion that seem to reoccur throughout time and history. Check it out!

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2740987755232169561

Seperation of Church and State

2009-04-01T18:03:00.000-07:00

During the past semester in this class I have heard a lot of new ideas and opinions which have impacted my beliefs on many different issues. One of the most significant changes I feel I have made is on my opinion of separation of church and state. While reading the assigned material I came across a statement that really made me think about this topic.

“However fraught with discord and even violence is the relation between a nation’s religion and political authority at any particular time, a deeper, more complex reconciliation between them is being worked out in the process.” (Lilla 184)

In my opinion what is trying to be stated here is that a nation’s religion and political authority will always have differences and problems but together they are working together to create order between their nations citizens. Both religion and government can create order and obedience and therefore are working towards a common goal. In this way a connection between church and state may not be such a bad thing. If they had a relationship with each other they would be able to coordinate with each other and try to achieve this goal together. The problem is when their goals are not exactly the same, and also when more than one religion is involved, conflict emerges. In most cases government and religion are working towards a common goal of obedience and proper conduct, so this is the less common problem, but it does make the more extreme group upset with the others practices resulting in conflict and/or violence. The problem of more than one organized religion being practiced within the domain of one political system is much more common in today’s world. With immigration being heavily practiced, and the expansion of different religious groups within a single society, most countries include many different religious or non-religious groups. This is where many problems arise. Most religions have different practices and beliefs. Because of this each one has its own goals it hopes to achieve with its followers. When the local government is involved they each fight with one another as well as the government to reach these goals. In this case it is important that the government have no connection between any one religious group. When the government keeps a separation of church and state it will be more successful at implementing its goal of law and order. I feel this separation of church and state can be seen to some extent in the United States. The U.S allows freedom of speech and religion and treats each faith equally, at least in theory.

Before I used to believe that it was a good thing to allow one faith, Christianity, to be connected with the U.S government in order to work together to maintain order and work towards a common goal of peace and unity. I have now come to believe that with the vast number of different beliefs held by American citizens this would only cause problems. I now believe that the most peaceful and proper way is to keep full separation of church and state, even more so than currently exists in America.

And we all love to watch the clips:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZiZcKomzHaU

Traveling to Europe

2009-03-30T10:55:00.000-07:00

During class time, we often focus on our perspective of religions as we know them here in America, but I'm sure that other from around the world will view these issues in a very different light. Fall of this year, I will be studying abroad on the Champlain Campus in Dublin, Ireland, immersed in a culture I truly know nothing about - even if I think I do. I've been spending a lot of time lately thinking about where else I want to travel during my four months in Europe and I know that England, Germany, and Italy are solidified on my list, with Spain and Scotland as close seconds.

I could easily give an explanation for what draws me towards England, Germany, Spain and even Scotland, but what perplexes me is my intense need to visit Italy. What about Vatican City draws me to it despite my distinct lack of belief in the Christian/Catholic religion? Why do I believe that visiting these places will enlightenment me - make me feel something beyond this world - a sort of mystical transcendence?

In a web magazine for New York teens, Nicole Farrow, a non-religious teen who visited Vatican City, quoted her experience

"It was overwhelming to experience the love and faith of all the followers in the church, and in a way I felt as though I belonged. The artwork and the beauty of the church made me feel guilty for not believing as devoutly as the pious followers believe. I felt serenity as I walked passed the ancient and historic artwork. I was able to just sit back and absorb the experience and reflect on where I am now and where I am going to be. As I looked around, I saw that people have found peace through religion, and I wondered whether I would be able to find that type of peace if I were religious."

Nicole was drastically changed by her experience in Vatican City, but I still want to know why.

In Material Christianity, McDannell briefly touches upon the studies done on how architecture effects religion.

"Increasingly, studies of architecture and art are being conducted by scholars outside of the art disciplines. These scholars wonder what social messages we receive as we walk through an art or a natural history museum?"

I don't know what this experience will bring to me. What affect do you believe Holy places would have on you? Do you think it would be a life changing experience?

True Evil

2009-03-24T16:32:00.000-07:00

Albert Fish was possibly the first American serial killer and he embodies the darkest permutation of the human mind. If there was ever an evil person in this world Albert Fish would be one of them.

WARNING!!!!! Don’t watch this video unless you have a strong stomach and you don’t mind the occasional bad dream.

The Myth of Pure Evil

2009-03-24T08:04:00.001-07:00

This is just a quick response to part of Tuesday's discussion. I want to quote a few parts of The Happiness Hypothesis by Jonathan Haidt, a professor of psychology, that seem relevant and insightful.

Most psychopaths are not violent (although most serial murderers and serial rapists are psychopaths). They are people, mostly men, who have no moral emotions, no attachment systems, and no concerns for others. Because they feel no shame, embarrassment, or guilt, they find it easy to manipulate people into giving them money, sex, and trust. (p. 137)

Haidt cites studies by Cleckley, 1955, and Hare, 1993, to support this statement.

In Evil: Inside Human Cruelty and Aggression, [social psychologist Roy] Baumeister examined evil from the perspective of both victim and perpetrator. When taking the perpetrator's perspective, he found that people who do things we see as evil, from spousal abuse all the way to genocide, rarely think they are doing anything wrong. They almost always see themselves as responding to attacks and provocations in ways that are justified. They often think that they themselves are victims. (p. 74)

According to Baumeister, we "have a deep need to understand violence and cruelty" through what he calls "The Myth of Pure Evil." (p. 74)

The Myth of Pure Evil

Evildoers are pure in their evil motives (sadism and greed)
Victims are pure in their victimhood (they did nothing to bring about their victimhood)
Evil comes from outside (a group or force that attacks our group)
Anyone who questions this moral certainty is in league with evil

The myth of pure evil is the ultimate self-serving bias, the ultimate form of naive realism. And it is the ultimate cause of most long-running cycles of violence because both sides use it to lock themselves into a Manichaean [good vs. evil] struggle. When George W. Bush said that the 9/11 terrorists did what they did because they "hate our freedom," he showed a stunning lack of psychological insight. Neither the 9/11 hijackers nor Osama Bin Laden were particularly upset because American women can drive, vote, and wear bikinis. Rather, many Islamic extremists want to kill Americans because they are using the Myth of Pure Evil to interpret Arab history and current events. They see Americans as the Great Satan, the current villain in a long pageant of Western humiliation of Arab nations and peoples. They did what they did as a reaction to America's actions and impact in the Middle East, as they see it through the distortions of the Myth of Pure Evil. However horrifying it is for terrorists to lump all civilians into the category of "enemy" and then kill them indiscriminately, such actions at least make psychological sense, whereas killing because of a hatred for freedom does not. (p. 75)

The four main causes of Violence and Cruelty

Obvious causes

1. Greed/ambition (violence for direct personal gain)

- Explains only a small portion of violence

2. Sadism (pleasure in hurting people)

- Explains an even smaller portion of violence

Biggest causes

3. High self-esteem

- Unrealistic or narcissistic self-esteem is easily threatened by reality

- In reaction to those threats, people often lash out violently

4. Moral Idealism

- Good vs. Evil (your violence is a means to a moral end)

- The ends justify the means

The major atrocities of the twentieth century were carried out largely either by men who thought they were creating a utopia or else by men who believed they were defending their homeland or tribe from attack. Idealism easily becomes dangerous because it brings with it, almost inevitably, the belief that the ends justify the means. If you are fighting for good or for God, what matters is the outcome, not the path. People have little respect for rules; we respect the moral principles that underlie most rules. But when a moral mission and legal rules are incompatible, we usually care more about the mission. The psychologist Linda Skitka finds that when people have strong moral feelings about a controversial issue - when they have a "moral imperative" - they care much less about procedural fairness in court cases. They want the "good guys" freed by any means, and the "bad guys" convicted by any means. It is thus not surprising that the administration of George W. Bush consistently argues that extra-judicial killings, indefinite imprisonment without trial, and harsh physical treatment of prisoners are legal and proper steps in fighting the Manichaean "war on terror." (p. 76)

Source:

Haidt, Jonathan. The Happiness Hypothesis. New York: Basic Books, 2006.

Religion in Government Bad?

2009-03-24T05:42:00.000-07:00

Throughout this class I have really learned a lot about the conflicts of different religions and the many different perspectives on them. I have come to the conclusion that everyone needs to just take a few deep breathes and stop being so obsessed that their opinion or viewpoint is the right one. Everyone needs to be more open to various ideas even if they don't agree with them. This whole idea came to my mind when I came across a video on youtube about atheists. I watched the video and didn't really know what to think. In a way it made many valid points on how the seperation of church and state lacks in many ways. It is obvious that our government isn't perfect when it comes to keeping religion and government completely seperate, but does it need to be. Aetheists argue and complain that religion is bad and that our Constitution is supposed to be about seperation of church and state. The majority of Americans follow some sort of religion though. It seems perfectly fine to me that government allow a little combination of church and state as long as the majority of citizens are okay with it.

"This is, after all, the only modern society in the world in which it is possible for a presidential candidate, when asked to cite the philosopher whose ideas had the greatest impact upon him, to respond by naming Jesus Christ. When Americans need to come together, as they did in the aftermath of the attack of September 11, it is religious buildings that they will turn." (Wolfe 247)

It is true that our country is supposed to keep government and religion completely seperate so that ones freedom of religion isn't imposed upon. I just don't see how it is so bad that the government allow a little religion in it. Nobody's rights are really being violated. This all just brings me back to my original opinion. In my opinion it seems dumb that everyone gets so hostile over little details when it comes to religion and or politics. People need to just be a little more open and relax. Watch this video on this atheist who needs to relax a little bit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1ImMtHrrKo&feature=related

Sea People Suicide Bombers

2009-03-23T21:36:00.000-07:00

I was thinking of what to write for this post and nothing immediately came to mind except for my mothers side of my family. When I was very young, my mother would bring me to church every Sunday and I never really thought much of it until I was in middle school. Sure, I hated waking up early and getting dragged out of bed, but for a while church was a time for me to think and let my mind wonder for an hour or so on the weekends. Some days I would listen to the priest and sermon, but that was rare. I usually ended up thinking about the bigger picture and of how much I really believe in it all. More importantly, church was a nice time for me to dedicate to letting my mind wander a bit.

Even though I was never really an active participating Catholic, I still went through the motions and got Confirmed in 8th grade. I was around this time that I started to question the fraction of faith I had. I started hearing about corruption in churches and many other disturbing stories; I couldn't look at the priests the same anymore. I'm not trying to make blanket judgments here, because I always had a lot of respect for my parish's priests-they were good people and told great stories. It's just that I never really identified myself as a full-swing Catholic, I sort of dabbled and lost interest.

The more I thought about religions and how many there are, it just reminded of how everyones worshiping the same sort of idea, just in different context. It's a little bit like different languages, people just have different interpretations depending upon their faith. But ultimately, religion fills the same purpose in everyone's life. It's there to answer uncertainty and fill a void in many peoples lives. The shame here is that religion can often turn people against each other over such a simple conflict. How can anyone be certain they're right? And is it really about being right? I definitely don't think so.

I remember watching South Park a while ago and this one episode really illustrated some of my thoughts on religion in a simple, but also pretty goofy way. Here it is.

Religion in Times of Crisis

2009-03-23T21:11:00.000-07:00

In light of all the economic and financial troubles across the country, I thought examining religions role in times of crisis would be applicable to our class ideas and current events. From my observations and research, it seems to me that people are naturally driven to religious beliefs in times of crisis and despair. The Great Depression, WW I & II, Vietnam, and 9/11, as well as several other tragic events have signified a surplus of religious followers to cope and find religious guidance regarding these inciting tragedies. People feel secure if religious faith backs up their conscience in life, especially if their life is filled with tragedy and overall trouble. Religion serves as a form of knowledge and belief where answers and guidance can be derived, which especially helps during times of crisis.

The most timely widespread tragedy that affects many is the recent recession and global financial economic meltdown. As a result of this downturn, retail stores wait for customers while church pews fill in with people looking for enlightenment just as quick as the worlds money floats away. For external web content, I found an article while searching religion in the news, a LA newspaper group called The Daily Bulletin wrote an article titled, "As times worsen, many turn to religion for help, comfort ," which identifies the increased role of religious faith within Americans after hard times, specifically referring to the current economic hard times.

The article states, "In times of affluence and prosperity there is a tendency to be forgetful of the divine, but when a crisis hits, it is natural for people to drift toward institutionalized religion or spirituality. People are hoping to find comfort and a source of optimism." It is clear that across the country, as a result of rough times, religious entities benefit and increase in size and fellowship. People now a days have lost their investments, their homes, their hard-earned money, and now most Americans feel like they have been cheated, with recent scandals in the news. All this tragedy currently embedded in our society transpires faith within people, proving to be an increasing popular coping method. The question to ask then is, what else inspires religious impulse and motivation in people other than hardships?

The article states, furthering the notion that people flock to religion in hard times, "Rabbi Sholom Harlig...in Rancho Cucamonga is getting more calls than before, he states, "'I'm spending a lot of time trying to help people, to counsel them, they are very, very worried.'" Humans naturally want to conjure beliefs/values in their brains to satisfy unknown questions, and to alleviate hardships. Churches want to help, comfort and encourage, to offer a sense of hope for their followers in times of financial crisis, it apparently takes a crisis for several people to allow themselves into God's way. This recent influx of people seeking guidance from religion resembles the period after 9/11, and other tragedies. When things go wrong, people look for things to blame, and look for answers. It is only natural that humans flock to religion and prayer for answers, and justification for their hardships. People consult with the church regarding lay offs or losing homes, as well as troubling marriages. The article also points out a 10 to 20 % increase in overall church attendance since last summer. Churches are getting several distress calls from congregation members each week, just as quick as the economy is plunging.

To further the notion that humans naturally conjure thoughts to create pictures of God for religious belief, especially for religious belief in a time of crisis, Mark Lilla is quoted from The Stillborn God,
"All religions...face a common challenge: to make relations among God, man, and world...offer[ing] pictures...[one must] unravel...God is at the center of all such pictures, and depending on how we conceive of him, our images of man and world can change. The picture itself revolves around the presence of God, where he is and where he can be sought in space and time" (Lilla 24).
Essentially this quote from this text describes how we create our own images of God within our lives. He describes how God is at "the center" of all deciphered pictures of the world people create in their brains, thus highlighting the significant increase of church goers during a time of crisis. As we all create our own unraveled images of God for our own purposes, such as an economic plunge, which proves to inspire more religious followers.

Works Cited:

DiMartino, Mediha. "As Times Worsen, Many Turn to Religion for Help, Comfort." Daily Bulletin. 2008. Los Angeles Newspaper Group. 23 Mar. 2009 .

Lilla, Mark. The Stillborn God: Religion, Politics, and the Modern West. New York: Vintage Books, 2008.

Virtual Religion- Formal Post 2

2009-03-23T09:25:00.000-07:00

In light of the assignment that our class has begun research on I decided to delve into one of my topics, Virtual Religion. Were in the 21st Century now, so as I could have guessed God has gotten with the times and is now online. Seeing as the internet is a useful tool that helps many of us in our daily lives, it no wonder religion has sought out web space for its followers. Making religion ultimately more convenient for those in practice, like www.saranam.com offers a way for people to order prayers at a Hindu Temple. A site that caught my eye was www.true2ourselves.com. It provides an online community for those of Christian faith that resembles face book with an online forum. Blogs, Poll's, Photo Galleries, and Even a featured video on the homepage. However, this concept of Internet Administered Religion seems to contradict religion itself. It seems to take away the experience of religion to make it more convenient for ourselves, but can we make God convenient? Doesn't it seem a little bit dis respectable to make Religion fit to your needs over the Almighty's? I did stumble across a posting in an online forum that was interesting titled "Your Parents Religion". The post does not renounce their faith, but clues us into the history that someone on this site might have, even doubts that person might have about religion. I don't agree with the idea of Online religious practice, but I feel like online communities open up new doors for people to find others of the same faith and values easily.

Cited Works

"Yale Daily News - 'Virtual' religion raises interesting questions." Yale Daily News - The Nation's Oldest College Daily. 23 Mar. 2009 .

"Your Parents Religion." Religious Website - Christian Community, Forums, Friends & Social Network. 23 Mar. 2009 .

"Blessed are the peacemakers"

2009-03-22T20:25:00.000-07:00

"Suspicion, intolerance, and mistrust are driving us apart..."

- Queen Rania Al Abdullah of Jordan

Earlier today I watched the movie Religulous. It was pretty much exactly what I expected it to be: a cynical atheist pointing out how funny and weird and ignorant and dangerous religious people are. I laughed along with it quite a bit, and I agreed with many of Bill Maher's points, but I didn't think the movie was very compelling. Many other atheists take a similar approach as Maher as they argue against religion. "These people think they're drinking the literal blood of a dead guy who was born from a virgin and will take them to a happy place in the sky when they die" [Cue wild, enthusiastic laughter].

Man, those religious folks sure are crazy, right? They sure are ignorant, right? Their ridiculous beliefs surely don't have a place in today's world, right? They can be dangerous, right? They are wild and crazy and stupid and deadly, right? And they can't be reasoned with, right? They are the enemy, right?

Okay, maybe people like Maher don't exactly go that far in their arguments. But I do think people who take the approach Maher takes in Religulous are headed in that direction, towards the ugly old Us vs. Them world-view that causes oh so many problems.

They identify an opposing side (i.e. religious people) and then make them out to be grossly ignorant and irrational and crazy. They do not attempt to understand the other side. (Or, rather, they make no attempt to help their audience understand the other side.)

Let's say a Christian approaches me and tells me "God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve!" Am I going to say, "Oh, wow, you're right. That makes sense. I'm going to completely change my lifestyle and beliefs now"?

No. There is no chance whatsoever that that will happen. What really will happen is that I will get pissed because I feel insulted. That person will be appalled that I don't listen because what he's saying makes such perfect sense to him. And he will walk away smug, knowing he tried to talk some sense into me but I am just too much of a fool to listen. Be we can see in this case that he is clearly the foolish one.

He demonstrated no respect for or understanding of my perspective. His argument was not catered towards my perspective. His argument was catered towards himself, to reassure him of his own views.

So, let's say an atheist approaches some religious people and tries to explain how ridiculous those people's views are. He asks them, "C'mon, do you really believe that wafer of bread is the body of some dead dude? That's ridiculous." How is anyone going to respond to someone who just rolls his eyes in response to everything that's contrary to his own views?

One scene in Religulous shows a crowd of Christians watching a reenactment of the Crucifixion of Christ. Jesus is drenched in blood, being mercilessly whipped by Roman soldiers, as he carries massive beams of wood on his shoulders. Each time he stumbles, the audience applauds and jeers. They are watching a display of hideous brutality, and they relish it. What the hell is wrong with them? the movie implicitly asks. These are some seriously messed up people, right?

So, I'll explain what is likely going on in their heads. They understand that Jesus accepted this brutal death. He easily could have escaped it, if he so desired. But he remained silent during his sentencing, and he never called any angels to his side to defend him. Jesus believes that by giving up his life, humans will be allowed to be forgiven for their sins. Every step he takes with the cross on his shoulders, he does so out of love for the very people who are jeering at him, whipping him, tormenting him. Every step he takes, he is forgiving them.

The Christian audience accepts that they themselves are sinners, and that by their own faults they have caused others to suffer. Therefore, they associate themselves with the Roman guards and the cruel onlookers who mock Jesus. They feel shame and guilt for the pain they have caused Jesus by hurting other people, yet they see that Jesus still loves and forgives them even as he's subjected to their most barbaric cruelty. The Christian audience feels deeply moved and comforted by this display of love and are reminded that they too should love and forgive their own enemies. Is this horrible and crazy and unreasonable?

How are we supposed to make progress if we don't try to understand the other side? If we treat the other side with fear and contempt without trying to understand their perspective, is there any doubt that we're going to make them out to be so much worse than they actually are? So much simpler than they actually are?

I'd like to highlight an excellent article by Jonathan Haidt, a Professor of Psychology at the University of Virginia. In this article he examines the divide between the liberal and the conservative frame of mind. As an illustration of one of his points, he describes a trip he once took to India:

I brought with me two incompatible identities. On the one hand, I was a 29 year old liberal atheist who had spent his politically conscious life despising Republican presidents, and I was charged up by the culture wars that intensified in the 1990s. On the other hand, I wanted to be like those tolerant anthropologists I had read so much about.

My first few weeks in Bhubaneswar were therefore filled with feelings of shock and confusion. I dined with men whose wives silently served us and then retreated to the kitchen. My hosts gave me a servant of my own and told me to stop thanking him when he served me. I watched people bathe in and cook with visibly polluted water that was held to be sacred. In short, I was immersed in a sex-segregated, hierarchically stratified, devoutly religious society, and I was committed to understanding it on its own terms, not on mine.

It only took a few weeks for my shock to disappear, not because I was a natural anthropologist but because the normal human capacity for empathy kicked in. I liked these people who were hosting me, helping me, and teaching me. And once I liked them (remember that first principle of moral psychology) it was easy to take their perspective and to consider with an open mind the virtues they thought they were enacting. Rather than automatically rejecting the men as sexist oppressors and pitying the women, children, and servants as helpless victims, I was able to see a moral world in which families, not individuals, are the basic unit of society, and the members of each extended family (including its servants) are intensely interdependent. In this world, equality and personal autonomy were not sacred values. Honoring elders, gods, and guests, and fulfilling one's role-based duties, were more important. Looking at America from this vantage point, what I saw now seemed overly individualistic and self-focused. For example, when I boarded the plane to fly back to Chicago I heard a loud voice saying "Look, you tell him that this is the compartment over MY seat, and I have a RIGHT to use it."

I would also like to draw your attention to what Queen Rania Al Abdulla of Jordan has been attempting on YouTube. Queen Rania created her own YouTube channel and asked viewers to "send me your stereotypes" about the Arab world so that she and others could attempt to break them down and discuss them. I highly encourage you to watch several of the videos on her channel.

We will not get far by simply demonizing that which we do not understand and are not familiar with. It is so easy for a person to lapse into the Us vs. Them mentality, but we ought to remember that one of the most influential humans to ever live once said, "Blessed are the peacemakers..."

What does St. Patrick's Day Mean to You

2009-03-16T17:34:00.000-07:00

In the spirit of today, St. Patrick's day, my blog post is about what this day used to mean to people and how much it has changed over time. St. Patrick's day is an Irish holiday every year on March 17th. It is considered a religious holiday that marks the anniversary of St. Patrick's death. This has been a religious holiday to the Irish for over a thousand years. I started thinking about how Irish families would typically attend church in the morning and celebrate at night but how now it is hardly viewed as being such a religious holiday. In recent years, St. Patrick's day has become less of a religious day and more of a celebration. The way I view St. Patrick's day ,because its how everyone else around me views it, is a night to go out with your friends and basically party. St. Patrick's day is still and will always be the celebration of being Irish but has lost its religious importance.
This also made me think about other holidays and how the tradition of them has changed over time. For Christmas, Easter and other Christian holidays, my family and I would always attend church in the morning. As I got older though I stopped going to church including on holidays. Christmas and Easter became just another reason to get together with your family and friends, have a big meal, and celebrate.
I feel this is exactly what we have been talking about in class and how religion has become less and less important over time. Wolfe states, "American Society is a nonliturgical society, its pace of life too fast, its commitments to individualism too powerful, its treatment of authority too irreverent, and its craving for innovation too intense to tolerate religious practices that call on believers to repeat the same word or songs with little room for creative expressions" (Wolfe).
Our traditions have changed over time and because we live in such a fast pace society and it is hard for people to find the time to be as committed to their religion as people were in the past. It is easy to see the differences in how we view religious holidays and the affect the decreasing religious beliefs have had.

Works Cited

Wolfe, Alan. The Transformation of American Religion: How We Actually Live Our Faith. New York: Free Press, 2003.

Controversy

2009-03-16T15:31:00.000-07:00

For this blog post I went straight to YouTube for ideas, and found a video that I think is interesting as well as comical. Religion has always stirred up controversy for one reason or another and this video does not disappoint. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RV46fsmx6E&feature=related

Batman and Morality (Informal Post)

2009-03-16T11:42:00.000-07:00

During one of the last classes, I brought up the end of Dark Knight when the Joker and Batman are discussing the morality of the people of Gotham City.

The first youtube clip shows the part of the movie where the inmate takes the mechanism to blow up the other ship and tosses it out the window, while the regular citizens on the other boat all want to blow the inmates up, but don't have the guts to do it.

The second clip is the discussion between Batman and the Joker. Batman talks about how the residents of Gotham were ready to believe in good, but the Joker knows that they'll break after they see the corruption of Harvey Dent. Harvey Dent, the White Light of Gotham, was symbolic for the idea that people need something to believe in - one of the primary reasons many of us believe religion exists.

First Part
Second Part

Does religion give people everything they need to believe in? If not, what else is there?

And what happens when religion fails to fulfill this goal?

Mythology and Modern Religion

2009-03-15T12:31:00.000-07:00

I never really thought about mythology until it was brought to my attention in my Scientific Revolutions class last Semester with Professor Bashaw. I can’t quite remember how the topic was brought up, but it was basically about how myths of certain ancient cultures shouldn’t be called myths at all. Our teacher explained how he didn’t like this because it’s not fair for the religious practices and beliefs of ancient cultures to be considered just “fictional stories” compared to the religious practices of today which are considered more “true.” I thought the statement was very interesting and I completely agreed with it. In a way, the stories of the past could be just as false as the religious stories of today. I also thought about how it would feel if someone of the past found out that what they were praying for would be considered a fictional story by someone of today. It was funny because I actually did have that experience when the topic was being discussed. I was trying to write something down and couldn’t pay attention to what the teacher was saying, until I heard the words “Christian Mythology.” I have no idea why (I’m not as religious as I used to be) but a voice in my head shouted “What the hell did he just say!?!” The comment caught me by surprise; it seemed very offensive that the religion I am associated with was being called “Fake.” Then again, I haven’t been to church in a while, don’t pray anymore, and my belief in religion in general is fading, so I probably shouldn’t take offense to that.

It would be impossible for me to tell you why religions of the past are now considered myths since this would take years of research. It could be because of a culture that fell long ago, such as the Greek, Egyptian, or Roman empires would also cause the religion it was mostly associated with to fall with it. Michael Brooks states in an article:

“It turns out that human beings have a natural inclination for religious belief, especially during hard times. Our brains effortlessly conjure up an imaginary world of spirits, gods and monsters, and the more insecure we feel, the harder it is to resist the pull of this supernatural world. It seems that our minds are finely tuned to believe in gods.”

It could be that after a civilization falls, and if it’s religion falls with it, people will go on and pray to new gods. The old gods, religious practices, and prayers must have been forgotten about, probably explain why they could be considered “myths”. Like what Michael Brooks just stated above, Humans need to believe in something. I guess if they can't believe in one god they must go to another, and the old gods are forgotten for what the stood for originally. Of course these are only theories of my own, there is most likely a better reason behind this.

Who knows, in the distant future some high school student is going to be writing a paper titled “Christian Mythology.”

While I couldn’t find a video relating directly to what I just said, but I have found a funny video by Seth McFarline. The religion the family in the video discusses is just as absurd as the religions of today (In my opinion of course.)

Credit:

Brooks, Michael. "Born believers: How Your Brain creates God." New Scientist. February 4, 2009.

Course Readings

Religion and Politics

2009-03-12T18:57:00.000-07:00

"We assumed this was no longer possible, that human beings had learned to separate religious questions from political ones, that fanaticism was dead. We were wrong"

GOD told George Bush to run for president, and our citizens were stupid enough to vote for him twice. He has put a halt to stem cell research due to his support from the religious right. He has put halts on abortion as well. How is it fair for our government to decide what our morals should be?

Meanwhile, Jesus camps are teaching our children at a young age some pretty scary things. They actually have children idolizing a cardboard cutout of George Bush. Our first amendment is clearly not followed by our political rulers. When will Church and State truly be separate?

Jesus Camp Video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=309MCU8TonE&feature=related

Lilla, Mark. The Stillborn God: Religion, Politics, and the Modern West. New York: Vintage Books, 2008.

Morality...continued

2009-03-11T21:41:00.000-07:00

Its hard to say whether or not religion is good or bad for promoting good morals in society-because there are just so many variants. However i do agree with you that one could argue it both ways. My grandparents were extremely religious and my dad was until about when I was 15, my mom on the other hand was not at all and now recently has become religious. I thought i was kinda rebellious for not going to church when i was younger and thats mainly why i didn't go- yet deep down felt morally bad or like i was doing something wrong. Now though, I thank myself for staying away from the church and following my moms earlier views.
The swap in religious significance with my parents has caused me to realize that the church does good for some people and can promote the right morals ethics and ways of living your life but i think that those same ideals can be taught in much better ways. My mom travels all over the world helping those less fortunate than us living in our first world country-and having traveled with her extensively I feel I obtained morals if not equal but better than some of the people I know who have attended church. Appreciating what you have and caring for those around you I feel are the essential basics to be morally good. The church may do this for some people, but for me the baggage that comes with the church is just ludicrous. Its so unsettling knowing the immoral and corrupt things the church has done in the past to humanity.
Speaking about the media or movies and morality is interesting as well because the church used to use similar forms of manipulation that the media uses today. Whats great now though is that they are working together- I saw on the news that a Bishop in Brazil spoke out against an abortion a 9year old girl had because her father raped her and got her pregnant- Now... where the hell is the morality in that?

News info from CNN.com

Morality and Religion

2009-03-11T16:22:00.000-07:00

It is always interesting to think about the relationship between religion and moral beliefs. For the longest time I have always felt that religion must positively influence the moral decisions that persons make. This could be because my mother’s side of the family is Roman Catholic and I have always been influenced by many of their beliefs and moral behavior. Although when I really started to think about it I realized that even though they are pretty religious their moral values are really no different from my dad’s side of the family which isn’t religious at all. This got me thinking about the relationship between moral beliefs and religion to a greater extent. Thinking back I now wonder why I have always felt that religion and morals are so closely related. I wonder if it is all the movies about the good old days when families were “perfect”. These movies made you think that every family would go to church on Sunday, eat dinner together every night, and never say a bad word to anyone. Hollywood and even many politicians like to make us think that things were better in the 50’s when families were close, the woman stayed at home, and divorces were uncommon. Maybe in some ways things were better back then, but what about all the segregation and racial violence?

I think that religion and morals have very little, if any, relationship at all. I feel that moral values come from society and human kindness. The majority of people simply want to act in a good manner to others because it makes them feel good. There will always be a minority that doesn’t care about being nice to others but this has always been true no matter how prominent religion is at the time. Religious institutes do emphasize good moral behavior, and for this reason whenever religious persons act in a good way others think it is because of their religion. But maybe its just because they’re good people. What about those religious persons that act in a bad manner?

“The prevalence of widespread cheating at a predominantly conservative Christian university would seem to confirm the views of those who believe that religion, far from having a positive influence on personal moral conduct, is more likely to produce hypocrisy than honesty.” (Wolfe 153)

This really got me thinking about this relationship between religious institutions and morality. I can’t seem to come to a conclusion, only a few perspectives. In one way it seems that religion can only help moral beliefs and therefore is good in our society. In another way religion makes many hypocritical or even acts as a way for some to justify wrong doings. So is religion really beneficial to good moral behavior in our society?

Work Cited

Wolfe, Alan. The Transformation of American Religion: How We Actually Live Our Faith. New York: Free Press, 2003.

Religion and Sports

2009-03-10T09:57:00.000-07:00

When asked to write about religion for this blog, I thought it would be somewhat easy considering all the different aspects of religion that we have covered in class. This task became a lot harder than I thought it would be as I considered different topics. Soon I found myself thinking about college basketball rather than the blog; this is when I realized how sports and religion are very similar and how religion plays a large role for many athletes and teams. Being a big sports fan I know how it can be following teams from season to season, watching almost all the games, checking updates and reading articles online, as well as debating over topics. This is behavior that somewhat mirrors what is done in religion, the total dedication and constantly being involved. It seems somewhat ironic that football games are on Sundays. Also, you always hear about sports teams being cursed and unable to win the World Series for whatever reason. This type of superstitious thinking reminds me of how people think about religion. Another comparison of how religion and sports are similar is the idea that if your parents are Catholic you’re going to be raised Catholic and share similar views. If your parents are die hard Yankees fans there is a good chance that you will be brought up to be a Yankee fan. Just like the feeling of being part of a sports team, being part of a religion group offers the same sense of belongingness. The idea of baseball players being extremely superstitious also reminds me of religion in the sense that one’s actions will have an effect on their future. In general I think it is surprising how many comparisons can be drawn between religion and sports.

Grimm Tales and Morality

2009-03-09T15:12:00.000-07:00

"Everyone in the United States, religious or not, lives in a world in which moral choices can be bewildering and their outcomes not always predictable."(Wolfe 127)

Not only does this apply to the citizen's of the United States, but to other people and places as well. I could not help but laugh at Wolfe's statement after this weekend. I saw the show Into the Woods which deals with many themes and among them are morality and consequences of choices. Throughout the show, the characters make moral decisions that have quite unexpected side effects. For example, in one scene, Jack's mother (from Jack and the Beanstalk) is arguing with a giant and upsetting it (and when giants get upset they are quite dangerous). Just then she is killed by being struck on the head by another character who claims he was acting for the greater good. Another example is when a character steals from a witch's garden. The character makes the (im)moral decision to steal beans for his pregant wife (who was craving greens) and as a result gets a curse laid on him.

After seeing the show, I started to wonder how much of our morals come from the classic Brothers Grimm type stories we were told as children. I also thought about my own faith, and how important the stories in the Bible were to interpreting what I think of as right and wrong.

How do you think fairy tale stories or other tales have affected your moral judgment on today's issues?

Here's one of the scenes I mentioned!

Direct Link Here

Feel free to leave a comment!

more serious, or less!?

2009-03-08T18:57:00.000-07:00

This idea came to me today when I was hanging out with my friends. It seems like our generation is a lot less serious about religion, than our parent’s generation. What I mean to say is, our parents follow religion more properly, or used to follow it well. You or a friend might be labeled with a religion, but you don’t necessarily follow it or care about it. Most kids in our generation I ask about their religion they say, “Oh, I’m this and this, but I don’t actually take it seriously.” I asked a Japanese girl, she said that she doesn’t follow the religion. I asked two kids from India, they said they don’t take it seriously, or they have their own ideals on the religious topic. So, it seems that it’s not just in America where this is going on, it’s happening all around the world. To me it really does seem like religion is becoming less serious in a way. Even our parents are becoming less serious about it. I will use my parents as an example. They used to a lot more religious when they first came to America, and ten years later, which is now… my mom has stopped going church almost completely, and my dad overlooks many rules or whatnot in his religion. My best guess is, it’s because of this sped up life style now a days. I’m sure there’s a lot more reasons why this is happening, so I’ll lets the class discuss it. And, I don’t want to write a lot like some people… you know who you are… >_>

And now a completely random video, cause I know you guys love videos... I have no clue what this movies about, but sounded cool. I would also like to mention that this video has nothing to do with my opinions. Enjoy. =D

The New Front of Religion in Young America

2009-02-24T05:16:00.000-08:00

With this blog post, I want to identify some thoughts I had, how the transformation of religion in America is leading to massive mega-churches. Churches with booming numbers with booming believers as they lead to a new face and front of religion in the US.
During this past week, glazing my eyes over at the sight of a computer monitor, I decided to read those two articles related to our paper due Friday. The article that most intrigued me was from the NY times, titled "The Soul of the New Exurb," written by Jonathan Mahler. This article highlights these growing mega churches in the US signifying the transformation, and increase of religious practices in booming cities among the young, married, white, middle-class conservative demographics in our country. The article was referring specifically to Surprise, AZ, a thriving town, thriving on a prosperous housing market, leading to a populous developing city. With this attraction for cheaper middle class homes in a thriving area for middle class couples, these conservative couples are being drawn to the city, increasing the population significantly. With this influx of a specific demographic, religious mega-churches have a great opportunity to recruit these new people who want to know more about the community, and the church. Hence, the advent of Radiant Church, founded in Surprise, AZ, recruiting these exact people I'm referring to, leading to the mass popularity the church has today.
The founder of Radiant church, Lee McFarland, saw an opportunity to build a successful church. When he came to Surprise to pursue this idea, McFarland came to a ''a radically 'un-churched' area.'' The article indicates that when he started to build this church he started to appeal to these families by sending out flyer's that attracted them, inviting them to Radiant. He needed a new modern approach to religion, to attract new members, instead on the traditional methods of church going. He says, ''You think church is boring and judgmental, and that all they want is your money?'' the flyer asked. ''At Radiant you'll hear a rockin' band and a positive, relevant message. Come as you are. We won't beg for your money. Your kids will love it!'' The church took of from there, the article informs, with its first Sunday meeting with 147 members, to its thousands of members steadily growing ever since. These religious practices appeal to this young front of America. The ways of practices, and the values presented at Radiant Church directly influence and target these conservative families, usually married and middle class, as the article suggests. Surprise, AZ voted in majority for Bush in the 2004 elections over John Kerry, if that doesn't suggest something, I don't know what does. This is a prime example of a mega-church in my opinion that is the new face, the new front of religion and politics in America. These churches populations are booming, the populations of the surrounding cities are booming, thus leading to an influx in church goers and recruiters in that city!
In the text, ''The Transformation of American Religion: How We Actually Live Our Faith,'' Alan Wolfe, writes that ''American faith has met American culture...and American culture has triumphed.'' The Radiant church appears to embody this claim, as well as my point for this post embodies this idea, that the massive front of American culture greatly involves American faith within it, as seen by the massive growing popularity of the Mega-church Radiant.
The article identifies McFarland's long-term plan for his congregates at Radiant, which "involves much more than playing video games and eating dough nuts. He says that his hope -- his expectation, really -- is that casual worshipers will gradually immerse themselves in Radiants many Christ-based programs, from financial planning to parenthood and education, until they have eventually incorporated Christian values into every aspect of their lives." This furthers the notion that mega churches are the new American cultural front in terms of religious views, and that they hope to incorporate these religious views within peoples day to day lives in American culture. This highlights this root for modern American religion in our modern times.
To conclude my point, this mega church phenomenon is the new face of American mass religion. The article also says, " It's (Referring to Surprise) an attractive price (Homes) for many families who are either trying to make the move into the middle class...which explains why the typical Surprise resident, as in many fast-growing exurbs, is a young, white, married couple of modest means."
This is my point here, this is the young generation making new families, this is the new face of America. This new front of American faith, which is mainly a conservative group in Surprise, AZ. The groups flocks to the community, attracting to the mega church there, and thus adding to the booming of the churches, therefore leading to this massive new front of prominent American religion in modern American culture. To me this exurban mega church, as well as many others, represents the future of Christianity in this country.

Works Cited:

Mahler, Jonathan. "The Soul of the New Exurb." The New York Times. March 17, 2005.

Wolfe, Alan. The Transformation of American Religion: How We Actually Live Our Faith. New York: Free Press, 2003.

YouTube Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnWg4wvwxpI

For some video for thought, here is a you tube video on a 20/20 investigation discussing the "possible rip-offs" or fallacies in these mega churches as the booming new front of American religion.

Marketing in Religion

2009-02-24T05:09:00.000-08:00

For a long time now in Western Society, Christianity has had the most powerful marketting campaign of any existing religion. I can't remember the last time a Jewish person knocked on my door to try to get me to convert, but in suburban America you probably get a few calls a year from one Christian group or another. Despite this continuous truth, the way in which Religion has been marketted has changed quite a bit over the years.

Originally, Christianity was packaged as a religion for the masses. The Savior, Jesus, was a carpenter, not a king, and walked the earth without need of material wealth. So too did the followers of Christianity preach in a way that made the poor seem superior: things like "The meek shall inherit the earth" or the concept that there is a Heaven where even the poorest are saved. One can see how it would be appealing to a serf that his downtrodden state was not an eternal affliction.

However, in the past few hundred years there have been many different takes on spreading Christianity. The Spanish spread it with missionaries and conquistadors as they pillaged the Americas. The puritans came to take religion as a strict social order, keeping the Word as a stern reminder against a wrathful God. The tactic of the Great Awakening was one of fear; messages like "You are held above a fiery pit and are doomed to burn. All that keeps you aloft is God's good grace; and don't think he won't let go!"
The Catholic Church has long taken the position of a moral compass, providing guidance for people and a translation of the word of God. This has proven more effective at some times than others, and in a modern arena more and more new tactics have been used to secure the faith of churchgoers.

What I find to be particularly surprising is that some churches are beginning to strip away the religious iconography in favor of a more powerful marketing campaign. When I first saw Dogma, I thought that such a time would never come when the cross would be replaced with an icon like "Buddy Jesus. "

Yet to my surprise, reading this article in the NY Times by Jonathan Mahler, "The Soul of the New Exurb," I found out that this new megachurch has ditched the cross in favor of lattes and Xboxes.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/27/magazine/327MEGACHURCH.html?pagewanted=3&_r=1
The first thing Pastor Lee did when establishing this "Radiant" church was to ask people why they didn't go to church and then change the church to fit their complaints.

Is this the new face of Christianity? A religion packaged in pop culture and stripped of all dogmatic influence?

The next thing we should ask is this: Is this a good change or a bad one?
On one hand, there is danger in having a moral compass that changes with the wind. If a religion embraces every trend that comes down the avenue there is a chance that the message will be lost along the way.
On the other, one of the most damaging properties of existing religion is the tendency to attack, exclude, or ignore others because they don't share the same belief system (a point that was made in Dogma by the Muse). Would a Christianity focuses on self-improvement and goodwill over scripture and Dogma be a negative change?

For class discussion today, if we have any, I wanted to discuss this because I have little experience with traditional religion and thought that perhaps the more informed members of our class would do a better job at weighing the positives and negatives of this situation.

For course readings click here:
http://secularsacred05.blogspot.com/search/label/course%20texts

Returning to the Past

2009-02-23T18:50:00.000-08:00

The past class we started to watch the film Dogma. This movie has countless underlying themes and connections to the controversial issues paired with religious belief. In the past, many religions groups sold indulgences. An indulgence is defined as a pardon of sins already confessed and absolved. Being baptized Protestant and then re-baptized Catholic, indulgences have always been a touchy issue.

Why would someone want to pay for an indulgence if they have already been absolved for their sins? An article in The New York Times that pertains to this topic said, "According to church teaching, even after sinners are absolved in the confessional and say their Our Fathers or Hail Marys as penance, they still face punishment after death, in Purgatory, before they can enter heaven." Although paying for indulgences was made illegal as of 1957, the church can still accept contributions. I don’t believe the church should be able to make money by helping people repent and be saved from their sins.

This is where Dogma falls into comparison. Mooby the golden calf was a false idol that was turned into a marketable character. One particular scene showed the company’s executive board with evidence scattered around that they had made quite a profit through their sins. One of the biggest commandments as discussed in class is “Thou Shall have no other gods besides me.” They created wealth for themselves by exploiting the belief of something portrayed as more important than God himself. This is one of the greater sins that according to religion holds more weight than other sins. For worse sins, you will spend more time in purgatory.

The article from the NY Times emphasized that the church is simply trying to boost the numbers of Catholics attending confession. They want to focus less on the Purgatory aspect, and more about living as Jesus did. Some churches advertise the choice to receive indulgences, and some don’t. The Catholic Church wanted to bring personal sin back into the lives of millions. They are doing so however, by holding punishment above our heads. God is metaphorically holding us above the fiery pit of hell in his fingertips. Simply sinning could send you through the cracks of God’s metaphorical fingers and send you spiraling to hell. I don’t believe in using hell as leverage to gain followers and support.

This same idea is touched upon in Dogma. The sole mission of Bartleby and Loki is to walk through the arches to be absolved of their sins to die with no sins on their slate. Bethany even speaks about going to church for fear of the wrath of God. The church is trying to scare us back into the pews. With mass attendees low, how better to get people to fill those seats than scaring people with the idea of sin, punishment, and hell?

Increasing knowledge of sin is a positive motive for bringing indulgences back into play, however I am still uneasy. How can an act or contribution be measured in the amount of years taken off of your punishment sentence? This isn’t how my personal beliefs line up. My belief is God doesn’t calculate how he’s going to punish every single one of his children every time they sin. I believe in a just God who forgives and loves. I don’t feel he is taking attendance at church or checking your name off when you pray. I believe in a God I was raised learning about, one who possesses unconditional love for everyone and anyone.

link to NY Times article: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/10/nyregion/10indulgence.html?pagewanted=2&_r=2

Vitello, Paul. "For Catholics, a Door to Absolution Is Reopened." The New York Times [New York City] 09 Feb. 2009.

The Tradition of Marriage is Troubled Because of Individualism? I Think Not

2009-02-21T16:42:00.000-08:00

Our class discussions have touched upon serious social issues that are being battled out between what Alan Wolfe describes in the introduction of The Transformation of American Religion as believers and non-believers. These discussions have touched upon suicide, homosexuality, and morality, but a subject that hasn't been discussed in great detail is marriage.

An article (which I'm going to link below) I stumbled across defined marriage as "previously understood as a sacred union given and governed by God for the stability of society". My question to the class then is, does marriage still stand as a sacred union given and governed by God? What difference is there between non-believers who get married and a gay couple who believes in God who want to get married, that gives the former the right to get married but not the latter?

The article I mentioned above is called "The Capital 'I' in 'I Do'" and discusses a survey by the National Marriage Project at Rutgers State University that claims that "the tradition of marriage is troubled today in large part because of an emerging cultural emphasis on individualism". I think this is bull, but let's look at what they have to say.

"Social scientists suggest the significant societal shift that is taking its toll on the institution of marriage can be attributed to the themes of personal independence and self-fulfillment....

...The recent family trends in the Western nations have been largely generated by a distinctive set of cultural values that scholars have come to label ‘secular individualism.’ It features the gradual abandonment of religious attendance and beliefs, a strong leaning toward ‘expressive’ values that are preoccupied with personal autonomy and self-fulfillment, and a political emphasis on egalitarianism and the tolerance of diverse lifestyles. An established empirical generalization is that the greater the dominance of secular individualism in a culture, the more fragmented the families...

...Increasingly, marriage—previously understood as a sacred union given and governed by God for the stability of society—is becoming viewed as a social contract to be terminated if it frustrates self-fulfillment...

...“The fundamental reason is that the traditional nuclear family is a somewhat inegalitarian group (not only between husbands and wives but also parents and children) that requires the suppression of some individuality and also has been strongly supported by, and governed by the rules of, orthodox religions. As a seeming impediment to personal autonomy and social equality, therefore, the traditional family is an especially attractive unit for attacks from a secular individualistic perspective."

Let's take a breather here for a moment and look at what they've said so far. Secular individualism teaches us to abandon religion to fulfill our own personal goals (because our personal goals can't be fulfilled while being religious?), while pushing us to believe in equality for all and the tolerance of diverse lifestyles (which we all know is a horrible goal to strive for). They go on to talk about how marriage is ended because of a lack of "self-fulfillment" and that the traditional family cannot be egalitarian because families require a "supression of some individuality" in order to function.

What? Perhaps my feelings on marriage is a belief not shared by my fellow peers across the nation, or perhaps even it is the secular individualism of the nation holding sway over me, but I feel like marriage does not require a sacrifice of oneself in order to make things work. I was under the impression that the vows given during a wedding meant that you accept the other person fully - both bad and good. That you're swearing to accept every part of them because you're willing to live with who they are.

I will often claim that the social value I hold in highest regard is my independence and personal freedom - it is one of the few things I would never give up no matter what. Without my freedoms I cannot be happy with who I am or where I am. My family understands this, and rather than being splintered away from my family because of my individualism, I am closer to them now than ever before. They support my right to make my own decisions and work with me to continually work as family unit even when I am states, or countries, away. And it is well understand that anyone who enters my life as a significant other must respect my high regard for these values, or in minimizing my freedoms, are disrespecting who I am.

Does this mean I can't be who I am - beyond the fact that I do not believe in a traditional God - and still be happily bound in matrimony?According to the National Marriage Project codirector Barbara Dafoe Whitehead, it does.
“We will have to adopt the view that personal happiness depends on high-trust and lasting relationships and that such relationships require constraints on short-term adult interests in order to foster long-term commitments to children, and thus to the future.”

I cannot accept that my personal happiness depends on another person, but that comes from my Native American upbringings and the beliefs I was raised on. I was told from a young age that "Only you can make yourself truly happy", and I will stick by that to the end. But that doesn't mean that I can't be happy in union with another person. It doesn't mean that I can't be a good parent and raise children in a stable atmosphere. I know what it means to be raised in a broken household, and I never want that for my children. And I don't need to sacrifice who I am to do that, because I believe who I am, or who I will be when I finally have children of my own, is the kind of person who will do just fine as a parent.

A conclusion statement from Barbara Whitehead went as followed:

"With each passing year these nations—including the United States—are more secular than ever before. The National Cultural Values Survey . . . found that regular churchgoing has dipped below 50 percent and only 36 percent believe “people should live by God’s principles.” The logical conclusion then, is that “America no longer enjoys cultural consensus on God, religion, and what constitutes right and wrong.”

Yet, Alan Wolfe would disagree.

"Religions can be astonishingly different, while human beings can be surprisingly the same... Study real people, and one is more likely to notice the similarities, not only among people of different faiths, but also between those for whom religion matters greatly and those for whom it matters not at all" (5).

I would ask each member of our class then - what does marriage mean to you, and how has your religious upbringing, or lack-there-of, affected it?

the last time I went to church

2009-02-17T06:15:00.000-08:00

I'm not sure what else to do for my blog post, so I guess I will just tell you a story.
In Junior high I had a friend named Sheri, who was a Christian, she said, a real one. She asked me to go to church with her when I was thirteen. There was a band playing and lots of snacks. She said the boys in the band were really cute. She said that the music was good and then afterwards there were skits and only a very short sermon. It didn’t sound so bad, being saved.

In the church there was a ruby red carpet and checkered tablecloths. It was set up like a cheap coffeehouse. There were pimply preteens everywhere. The band was okay. I remember wishing we could all just sit down in our chairs, I didn’t understand why we all had to stand with our hands in the air, and why no one was looking at the band, but at the ceiling instead. About halfway through the show I realized that people weren’t dancing; they were swaying and praying, and half of them were crying. I felt my face getting red again, the kind of red that it only gets in church.

After the band played some girls did a skit. One of the girls didn’t devote herself to Jesus. Her friend was begging her to save her soul from hell. The devil girl agreed and they were on their way to church when they both were killed by a car. The angel girl went to heaven, while the devil girl was dragged to hell by demons, screaming the entire way off stage. My friend Sheri turned to me clapping hysterically, “wasn’t that powerful?” About a year later her church was shut down and charged with embezzlement. All the souls that they saved cried for days.

Religious Tradition in Law

2009-02-17T05:43:00.000-08:00

Religious tradition has had a strong influence on American society from the get-go. As many religious traditionalists have pointed out, our founding fathers were Christian and the belief system that they based the Constitution on was that of enlightenment-period Christiandom.
Interestingly, although the founding fathers intended a "seperation of church and state," they also granted both the freedom to practice religion and the freedom to vote. Combined, these two form the right to vote based on your religious belief; something that is not uncommon in modern American society.

Because our lawmakers are elected, this means that the religious beliefs of the masses can have a subtle yet no less powerful impact on the way laws are written. In America today, I would describe our law as "selectively Christian" in the sense that, although many laws based on religion are rejected as unconstitutional, many laws which do not uphold traditional religious values meet heavy resistance because the voters have religious opinions. Take for instance the example in The Transformation of American Religion regarding the idea that the galvanization of the evangelical right against Roe v Wade may well have made the difference in the election of George W. Bush (Wolfe 117).

This is by no means a recent occurance. In fact, our laws have been passively created from a Christian foundation despite the secular nature we attribute to them. As I have mentioned before, suicide is considered illegal in most places in the U.S. In fact, it has long been supposed that suicide denotes insanity (suicidal tendencies can be used as proof of insanity in a courtroom). I maintain that this is a fundamentally Judeo-Christian viewpoint. Although it may be considered a sin in the eyes of the Judeo-Christian God, under the first ammendment we should not require the non-Christian to abide by a traditionalist's definition of sin.
We have the right to life, liberty, and property. We are allowed to give up our property and our liberty, why wouldn't we be allowed to give up life?

There has been a debate over whether suicide denotes insanity. This NY Times article draws a line between "true suicide" for trivial reasons, and "reasonable suicide" when circumstances make life too painful to live. (Article by S.A.K. Strahan)
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9403E3DC1F39E033A25757C1A9679C94659ED7CF

This issue is still very much at hand in American politics. California act AB 374 was incredibly controversial. This act gives the dying the right to suicide to avoid the last painful moments of a deadly disease. Click here for an article by Frank D. Russo about the "Compassionate Choice" act:
http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2007/03/california_comp_1.html

Check out this Youtube video on AB 374 (I couldn't figure out how to embed). Tom MacDonald speaks to the California assembly.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82vi7F5mnsE

I find it amazing that there is so much controversy over suicide among dying people. It seems we are a long way off from legalizing meaningless suicide. Apparently you have to live your life whether you like it or not. That's what we call freedom.

For more citation info on Wolfe, http://secularsacred05.blogspot.com/search/label/course%20texts

All men are created equal

2009-02-16T21:15:00.000-08:00

Over the course of this class one question has continued to bother me. My question is that if in the U.S. “All men are created equal” why are people who simply give themselves another label or are labeled something outside the norm treated differently and more importantly why do people care so much.
I don’t have a complete answer to this question but I do have a theory. My theory is that people who believe in their religion beyond a shadow of a doubt believe that there religion is the right one and therefore the one that everyone should fallow. This takes its most basic form in religious symbols and objects. According to McDannell “Religious objects also signal who is in the group and who is not. They teach people how to think and act like Christians. They are used to lure, encourage, and shock non-Christians into considering the truth of Christianity”. I for one believe that a person should be able to believe in whatever they want so long as it doesn’t interfere with the rights of anyone else. Hopefully our old friend George Carlin can help me get this point across.
Work cited
McDannell, Colleen. Material Christianity. London: Yale University Press, 1995.
“THIS COUNTRY IS FINISHED GEORGE CARLIN ON COUNTDOWN” YouTube. 23 October 2007. 16
February 2009.

Altars

2009-02-16T19:21:00.000-08:00

This week we spent time a full class going around the room discussing each of our altars. They all represented our personalities and who we are as people. It got me thinking about how we each our own person and this brought me back to the old saying that the USA is the Great Melting Pot. This brought back some memories of School House Rock and this video:

This brought me to thinking about the slide show of altars that we saw in class earlier and how even within a single religion there are vast differences in what people believe and how they show that belief.

Ten Commandments

2009-02-09T23:55:00.000-08:00

Ten Commandments, what are they and who really cares? Our last class discussion ended on the Ten Commandments and I thought it would be a good topic to bring up for our next blog discussion. As I read Alan Wolfe The Transformation of American Religion, it inspired me to think about how people today are so vulnerable towards religion. From Alan Wolfe’s readings I gathered from that resource that most people today have very strong beliefs in a said religion but they don’t necessarily understand it. That’s why the Ten Commandments were a perfect specimen to observe.

“Most people know the Ten Commandments or perhaps it is better to say that they think they know the Ten Commandments. The commandments are one of those cultural products that people imagine that they understand, but in reality, they frequently can't even name all of them, let alone explain them.”

So, what do people really believe when it comes to the Ten Commandments? Well I would like to think that there is a small gap between what the Ten Commandments actually state, and what people really follow. Most people incorrectly believe that all of the Commandments represent moral behavior in current society. For instance: to not lie, steal, or commit adultery. However I believe that in today’s age the messages that were trying to be conveyed back when the Commandments were written has a slightly different juxtaposition of poise and content conveyance towards a progressive neutral society.

I also found an interesting website 10 Commandments in America that asks some of the important questions like: What are the Ten Commandments? What do people believe about the Ten Commandments? Should people follow the Ten Commandments? If you would like to know the answers,check out the website.

Evidence of this conclusion can be found in many text books, both of philosophers and mildly entertaining connoisseurs of religious preferences. However there is hope that one may find the answer to this religious argument by simply asking themselves: what are the real definitions of these religious jurisdictions and how would the hypothesis benefit society in general, or even, just maybe benefit everyone individually as they see fit.

This video is about how Ten Commandments can be turned just only in three.

-Andrei

Organ's Are Not The Problem

2009-02-09T20:14:00.000-08:00

This past weekend, I arrived at UVM's Catholic Center at 5:30 to practice the various musical pieces and hymns in the mass. As we sang the opening song, I felt a rush of emotion that I can only describe as a spiritual connection. The music that was only text on a page a few moments ago was suddenly full of a new meaning to me. The harmonious sound of the choir imbued a feeling of joy to be in God's presence. I could not help but smile as I sang! (The congregation also seemed to appreciate the sound as well as I saw quite a few people swaying back and forth and bouncing.)

In Alan Wolfe's book The Transformation of American Religion, Wolfe says that many members of churches prefer to hear more modern music and "turn away and leave the moment they hear an organ". (29)

RUN! IT'S AN ORGAN!

I must respectfully disagree.

I believe that bad music drives people out of church, not old or unfamiliar music. Due to dwindling numbers of churchgoers, musicians for each and every church have been hard to find. Most churches are so desperate to find a musician, they let almost anyone who can play a piano or barely carry a tune do it. Nobody wants to sing in mass when the pianist can't keep the rhythm consistent. (True story but that's for another time.)

One thing I do not disagree with Wolfe in is the idea that music is a key factor in keeping attendance! In my experience, the churches that I have attended in the past (about 15-20 different ones) that have, in my opinion, better music than others, get higher attendance and more participation from mass goers. The Cathedral in my home town pays a different professional musician to come each week. These paid musicians give outstanding performances and each week there is a new one to see. Compared to other churches in the area, the number of people who show up for this mass in particular is quite large. There are so many, that I often times cannot find a seat for myself. Another example is a comparison between two churches similar in location and but different in size. St. Mary's church and St. Matthew's are close to each other distance wise, but St. Matthew's is a bit larger and has a larger member base. However more people attend St. Mary's each week. Why? Most people you ask will tell you (I have asked myself) the music is better.

Now, I can go on and on listing examples of why I think GOOD music increases attendance (If you want the full list ask me when you have about an hour or two to spare). But I think an even more important question is why. I think that the power of music lies in its ability to channel ideas and emotions into one output. Music makes it easy to combine the intent of words, with the feeling behind the intent. It makes having a sacred moment easier and more natural. I don't think there is anything natural about reciting a prayer in a zombie like fashion. But when put to music, people put the words together with the feeling of the music. Crescendos tell people of climax and importance, and musical notes help put together the phrasing of sentences in ways that make sense. As one of my choir teachers once told me, singing in church is like praying twice. I think she meant that in one sense you are saying the prayer, and in another sense, the music you are putting behind the prayer is giving it meaning to you.

I know it's a little cheesy, but I'm sure many of you are familiar with the movie Sister Act, with Whoopie Goldberg:

Direct Link Here

This clip sums up my ideas on how good music can stir people to become more involved and connected in their respective religious experiences.

So my question for this week is: What are your thoughts and experiences with religion, music and spiritual connections?

Feel free to use the comments section and tell me what you think!

Religion = Violence ?

2009-02-08T18:47:00.001-08:00

Religion means many things to many different people. It gives us a set of ways to live our lives. It gives us a reason to why we exist. It gives us a sense of belonging. It gives us something to believe in. Religion is supposed to bring us together. However, when different religions are brought into close contact with each other conflict and violence sometimes erupts. As Alan Wolfe states in The Transformation of American Religion “ Religion, in short, is valued because it opens a window on the sacred, a realm of life that we treat, in the words of Peter L. Berger, ‘as ‘sticking out’ from the normal routines of everyday life, as something extraordinary and potentially dangerous’” (Wolfe 245).

Different religions give us different things to believe in, and sometimes when these different beliefs come into contact with each other violence erupts. This isn’t because religion tells us to be violent towards other different religions. Religion does not tell us to fight and kill those that don’t believe in the same things we do. People sometimes take religion in this way and some of the biggest conflicts in history were based off of these religious conflicts (such as the holocaust). Some people tend to feel so strongly about their religion that when they see other people who follow some other religion that conflicts with theirs, they feel the need to do something about it. Sometimes this might just be trying to convert them to your religion or it can be praying for their soul. Other times, a small fight could start which can then grow into a large war between the two religions.

Even though religions are able to coexist in many parts of the world, violence still erupts to this day between different religions across the world. This video shows how in Orissa, Hindu believers attacked Christian homes and churches.

Zombie Jesus

2009-02-06T08:10:00.000-08:00

So, I was surfing the web right after class and cam across this. I thought it might get some laughs and kinda pull out a lighter side of religion.

Lewis Black and the Superbowl Take 2: The Ritual

2009-02-03T12:13:00.000-08:00

I think this is more relevant to our discussion today than Geoff's post, and definitely contains less profanity!! We'll watch in conjunction with Cal's post on Friday.

Comedy Central Presents

Lewis Black - The Super Bowl

Lewis Black and the Superbowl

2009-02-03T07:26:00.000-08:00

Television Religion

2009-02-03T05:13:00.000-08:00

In light of the Altar Project and thinking about how I can relate my major to this course I came up with one of the largest symbolistic culprit of our time, television. Being a digital film major makes it difficult to not see the influence of mass media on the general public. When I went looking around for statistics I began to notice something. Television and religion do not exactly get along, in fact religion is threatened by it. In l985 the A. C. Nielsen Company said that , "the television set was on in the average home seven hours and seven minutes a day." That was in 1985! Since then not seeing a television anywhere has become irregular . Most of us get our daily information fix for the day from it. From weather to current news, constant entertainment and information is available at just the push of a button. Its easy to see why religion can become fearful of TV, because TV is the new age opiate of the masses. Many of us don't even realize how powerful television is in shaping culture. In my a/v digital editing class we are learning about how the juxtaposition of certain images cut in a sequence can bring about different ideas and emotions that are not literally shown. Just like the Bible uses different passages to convey meaning that most of the time is not literally what is presented. Much like religion people tent to put "faith" into there television watching subconsciously. Its easy to believe everything that is on television, and for our society today "easy" is most definitely in.

Mind Control

2009-02-02T19:42:00.000-08:00

Alan Wolfe writes in The Transformation of American Religion,

Ritualized worship has many distinctive characteristics, including its emphasis on drama and narrative, its reliance on symbols, and its bodily appeal to the senses more than to the mindful qualities of the intellect. But what distinguishes ritual above all else is the lack of space it makes available for individuals to decide for themselves methods of worship that fit their own dispositions. Protestantism, in the view of many Catholic traditionalists, puts its emphasis on an individual's sense of inner conviction, while Catholicism, at its core, stresses the magical power that flows from collective participation in sacramental worship.

I attend Catholic Mass regularly, so many things this reading discussed were familiar to me.

A couple of months ago, in the middle of the presidential campaign circus, I had read this excellent article on Cracked.com: 6 Brainwashing Techniques They're Using On You Right Now.

Chanting Slogans

There are many points during the Mass where all the assembled people are supposed to speak together in unison. Services are filled with the singing of lyrics based on Biblical versus. At one point the people speak the Nicene Creed, professing their beliefs. At another point the Deacon reads a list of prayer intentions, and the congregation is expected to say "Lord, hear our prayer," in response to each. I make sure I remain silent when they get to the part about protecting the alleged sanctity of marriage.

Controlling what you watch and read

The church is quick to pass judgement on what films a good Christian should and shouldn't watch.

The Da Vinci Code - Bad!

The Golden Compass - Bad!

Brokeback Mountain - Bad!

The Chronicles of Narnia - Good!

Private schools and homeschooling are also popular among religious families, to protect the children from the secular influence of the public school system. A group called Exodus Mandate calls for an exodus from the public schools.

Keeping you in line with shame

Black and white choices

Us vs. Them

The Catholic church regularly declares that something is Truth. It makes sure its followers are familiar with its laundry list of sins. There's the black and there's the white, there's good and there's evil, Heaven for Us and Hell for Them. Moral relativism is dangerous according to the Pope, the infallible leader of the Catholic church.

When I think of organized religion I am often reminded of The Sharing from the Animorphs book series by K.A. Applegate, a series I loved as a kid. Part of the premise of the books is that aliens called Yeerks are seeking to enslave the human race. Yeerks are parasitic slugs that crawl into a person's ear and meld into the brain, controlling everything the person does from then on. Instead of waging a war to conquer the planet, the Yeerks decide to secretly infiltrate human society through an organization called The Sharing.

On the surface, The Sharing is a friendly organization committed to serving the community. It is often compared to the Boy Scouts. It provides people with a sense of community, a sense of belonging, of being part of something greater than the self. But once you join them, they slip a slug into your ear and gain control of your brain. An interesting metaphor.

That's an image that often sticks with me when I'm at church, surrounded by people speaking in unison. Or when I hear anything about the Church of Scientology. It's an image that sticks with me when I watch videos of the children of Westboro Baptist Church smiling sweetly and singing about eternal damnation for everyone God hates.

This except from the Animorphs book Visser describes the formation of The Sharing, how it was designed to exploit the weaknesses of the human race:

And, once I had the seed money, several hundred million, I began to create The Sharing.

It would cater to one of the most fundamental human weaknesses: the need to belong. The fear of loneliness. The hunger to be special. The craving for an exaggerated importance.

I would make a haven for the weak, the inadequate, the fearful. I would wrap it up in all the bright packaging that humans love so much.

The Sharing would never be about weak people being led to submit to a stronger will, no, no, it would be about family, virtue, righteousness, brotherhood and sisterhood. I would offer people an identity. A place to go. I would give them a new vision of themselves as part of something larger, erasing their individuality.

I needed only one thing before I could go to the Empire, call the Council of Thirteen, and present them with my accomplished fact: I needed one human, just one, to submit voluntarily.

If I could show them one human who had surrendered his or her will and freedom, without threat of violence, I could convince the Empire to follow my path. The way of infiltration.

The first meeting of The Sharing took place on a Saturday. Thirty-five people attended.

I had done a tremendous job in a very short time. I had studied human history, supplementing what Allison Kim already knew. I studied every cult, every movement, every great, mesmerizing leader that had ever held sway over humans.

And by the time those thirty-five humans came into the rented hall, I had adorned the walls with symbols and flags and icons. All the visual nonsense that moves the susceptible human mind.

They filed in, some in small groups, but most alone. They were stirred by the inspirational music. Flattered by the attention paid them by attendants I’d hired from a temp agency. Impressed by the expensively produced booklets we handed out. Awed by the pictures and symbols that draped the walls.

I spoke to them from the stage. Not as Allison Kim, of course, because all my links to Allison Kim would have to be concealed before my fellow Yeerks arrived.

I had carefully picked a human host for just this one purpose. His name was Lawrence Alter.

A real estate salesman. I changed his name to Lore David Altman. Three name combinations were popular then.

He was a charismatic man with a loud, deep voice and an abundance of hair. Just the sort of face that humans respond to, though his brain was a wasteland compared to Allison’s.

Allison Kim had been left handcuffed to a radiator in a hotel room, awaiting my return.

Later, after it was over, I found I couldn’t recall exactly what I’d said to this first meeting of The Sharing, not the specific words. A lot of high-flown rhetoric touching on the themes humans love to hear: that they are special, superior, a chosen few. That their failures in life are all someone else’s fault. That mystical, unseen forces and secret knowledge will give them power.

The next Saturday there were more than twice the number of humans. And already I had begun to explain that there was an “Outer” Sharing, and an “Inner” one. The humans in the “Outer” Sharing were wiser, better, more moral, superior to the average human, but not as superior as those lucky few who had entered the “Inner” Sharing.

Of course at that point there was no “Inner” Sharing. Just seventy or eighty humans sitting in plush chairs and being fed an endless diet of words that had no clear meaning.

The Inner-Sharing, that was the test of true greatness. And all a human had to do to enter was to surrender their will.

This was what Essam, who had infested only Lowenstein and Hildy, would not credit: that humans would surrender their freedom in exchange for empty words. But I had infested the lost soldier, and the even more lost Jenny Lines. I had tasted human defeat and superstition and weakness.

I knew.

- K.A. Applegate, Visser, p98-100.

Craziness at Kansas City

2009-02-01T22:10:00.000-08:00

This past week in class we have discussed variety of topics on religion and to be more specific we talked about religion and gay marriage. Gay marriage is considered to be wrong and there are a lot people who really hate even to think that they are living among them. Well in Kansas City the religious fanatics of the Westboro Baptist Church are taking things to the extreme level.

The church fanatics were protesting outside the military funeral with very provocative signs. Those horrible signs were offending the families of the dead soldiers, but it also offended me as I watch this craziness to unfold. I still can’t believe that people take religion so serious that they actually lose their mind in it. It shocks me to see how people can be manipulated so easily just by one person name Phelps(The leader of the church). As for the follower, those people can’t think for themselves, they are brain washed with this rubbish since they were little kids. The worst part about it is that most of the members of the Westboro Baptist Church are from Phelps’ own family. There is defiantly something wrong with this family, maybe they’re inbred, mentally if not physically.

This issue was brought up because some people say it was a violation of the 1st commandment(Freedom of Speech). Well let’s look at it a little closer. The Phelps people still have the right to say whatever they want. But they do not, however, have the right to say it wherever or whenever they want. What kind of church going person with a good appreciation towards Gods' teachings would ever hold up a sign saying “God hates Fags”.

If there is a hell, these idiots will have a special place waiting for them. Plus those Westboro Baptist Church fanatics got sued for 11 million dollar. There are a lot of people hoping it will be the end of the Westboro Baptist Church and their stupidity. The full story is available here.

Thank you for reading,

-Andrei
P.S I'm still outraged by those brain washed idiots.

Formal Post: The "Stupid-Bowl"

2009-02-01T14:45:00.000-08:00

Alright-symbols. How about a great American one; Football...

With the super-bowl coming up in a couple hours now and everyone getting all pumped up as I sit in my room contemplating this ridiculous event, and wonder what to write my blog post about. I'm thinking of symbols, religion, some sort of issue that would create a good discussion. So, getting more and more fed-up thinking about it, I realize here in itself is a great symbol, and some even call it their religion. Football, is it Sacred or Secular, Super or Stupid?
What is it about this game that makes it so American's love it? We have taken a secular activity in my mind and transformed into a sacred pass time. I am so sick of how overblown and capitalistic this sport has become, and how we all sit around and let it totally consume us. Even people who I know dont like football simply watch it for the commercials- come on! (Although I will admit the Bridgestone commercials were brilliant, yes I am a hypocrite.)
In our readings McDannell says,"During the first half of the twentieth century, cultural critics observed that a powerful "cultural industry" made up of the media, popular arts, entertainment, and fashion controlled the desires and needs of the "mases"."(10) The media has shoved whatever it has wanted down our throats whether we like it or not just as the church did before the media was around. "For the sixteenth-century Protestant reformers and the powerful Catholic church manipulated weak people through images and trinkets." The media has turned football into our religion.
I have done a fair amount of traveling outside of the United States and have come to understand football as being the iconic American sport in the eyes of the majority of each person I have talked to. Why is this I ask myself? Could it possible be the relation between America being the most materialistic and capitalistic driven country in the world and football being the most popular form of media mindwash? Either way it is a symbol that speaks loud and clear the more I think about it. Our general of central command tossed the coin to open the game for goodness sake... If that doesn't say "this is America" I don't know what does.
I do know that I have had enough between John Madden, the 3 hour pregame show, hour long halftime show with good old "born in the USA" Bruce Springsteen and 10 million dollar commercials which lets be honest...half of our class probably could come up with more entertaining ones.

Okay, I'm done my rant now.

-Cal

p.s. I know I started with saying it was a couple hours before the game and I posted this at 6:30 on Monday, but I needed to add a few more thoughts after letting the full scale of the event set-in.

Faith, Religion, and Winnie the Pooh

2009-01-29T19:01:00.000-08:00

Hey, this is Dan Merrill again.

In my first post I didn't really mention anything about my own experiences with and views on religion, so I'd thought I'd take a few minutes to do that now with another informal post.

I was raised Catholic. For most of my life, I was a very earnest and devoted Catholic. I'm also gay, so that created some conflict. I have an awful lot to say about this experience, but that can wait for another time. Long story short, I've learned the value of thinking for myself.

Right now, I'm not really able to sort out what my religious views are. I don't want to slap an atheist/agnostic/Catholic/believer label on myself because I understand the merits of those different perspectives and the logic behind them, and I vacillate between them.

There are some things I'm not very fond of when it comes to the debates between the secular and the sacred. I hate when people lean too heavily on the Bible or any other religious text. I do not think the Bible is the word of God so much as it is a library of different books written for different reasons that has been horribly abused over the years by people who close their eyes and follow it blindly. Whoever it was that wrote "On the first day God made this, on the second day God made that," probably was more influenced by the need for poetic coherency than by some divine insight into the origins of the universe.

I also don't really like when atheists state that they'll believe anything, no matter how ridiculous, so long as they're presented with proof, and that they won't believe in God until he proves his existence. I don't think this is illogical, but I think it shows some ignorance of humankind's relationship with God and the nature of faith. If there is a God, I think it might be better for him not to provide us with proof of his existence. What would life be like if we knew with absolute certainty that God exists?

Wouldn't we be a lot weaker?

I think it's cool that Nick mentioned the Tao of Pooh, because I'm also going to use Pooh to explain a bit about religion. One of my favorite Disney movies as a kid was Pooh's Grand Adventure: The Search for Christopher Robin. When I watched it again more recently, I noticed that the movie seemed to have religious overtones. One of the central themes of the story is faith, and the movie does a really neat job of showing its value.

The movie begins by showing Pooh's complete love for and dependency on Christopher Robin. If you watch this song, "Forever and Ever," notice how it seems to reflect the relationship between a devout Christian and Christ.

"I want to be with you, forever. I want you right here, beside me, forever."

- Pooh

Christopher Robin asks Pooh what would happen if they were separated, and Pooh says he wouldn't be able to go on. Christopher Robin tells Pooh that he's braver than he believes, stronger than he seems, and smarter than he thinks. He says even when they're apart, they'll always be together, and the next day he disappears.

Pooh and his friends ask Owl to read the note Christopher left behind, but Owl misinterprets it, saying Christopher went to Skull instead of school. I think Owl's song, "Adventure is a Wonderful Thing," might be similar to what God would have to say if we could ask him why he left us alone in this life.

"Perhaps you could join us?"

"No, no, you go ahead."

- Pooh and Owl

Rabbit believes with absolute certainty that the map Owl gave them is infallible and will guide them straight to Christopher Robin. This song, "If It Says So," is the movie's most obvious bit of allegory. I think it's a brilliant satire of people blindly following the Bible.

"Never trust that thing between your ears. Brains will get you nowhere fast, my dears. Haven't had a need for mine in years. On the page is where the truth appears."

- Rabbit

The group ends up lost, and Pooh's faith wavers.

"I need you to come here and find me, cause without you I'm totally lost. I've hung a wish on every star. It hasn't done much good so far."

- Pooh

Later, Pooh falls into a pit at the bottom of a cave and is trapped there alone. He talks to Christopher Robin, telling him how his friends were so brave, strong, and smart on their search for him. Then he remembers Christopher saying that they'd still be together, even if they were apart, and Pooh realizes that Christopher would always be a part of him.

The movie ends with Christopher Robin returning from school and finding the group. He talks about what it was like being separated from his friends and then tells Pooh that he'll have to leave again the next day.

There may or may not be a God, but if there is one, I think it might be wise for him to let us live apart from him (though my thoughts on the concept of eternal damnation are another issue). I don't think it's foolish for people to believe in him without proof.

My younger sister is handicapped with Rett Syndrome. She cannot walk or talk, and she has seizures regularly. We love her very much, but it takes a lot for my family to take care of her. It puts a lot of strain on my parents, and their faith is one of the reasons they're able to cope. Their religion is a tremendous source of strength.

When Pooh is separated from Christopher Robin, he learns that he is braver than he believes, stronger than he seems, and smarter than he thinks. He wouldn't have learned that if he didn't have to spend some time alone.

intro

2009-01-29T08:52:00.000-08:00

So I'm a little late, but hey I'm Clara. I have high hopes for this class, I have taken a couple religion classes before and it is always interesting to learn the differing faiths and viewpoints in the classroom. As for my own faith, I don't really have any. I enjoy the mystery surrounding creation, birth, and death. I figure we will all find out when we die, and if we don't we won't know the difference...because we'll be dead.

Informal Introduction

2009-01-26T19:20:00.000-08:00

Hello, my name is Nick Wright. I am not exactly sure of my religious beliefs. They are always changing. I was not a churchgoer at youth and was never interesting in sitting down for extended periods of times. However, my buddies introduced me to a Christian "youth group". It was some of the best times of my life. We would eat pizza, play games as a group, and talk together about stories of the bible and of moral values.

One day at youth group, the leader told me how to alleviate my sins. He said all that I had to do was accept Jesus as my savior. I did. I was happy.

Then I started to hear about the corrupt things certain religious people were doing. Two examples on the top of my list were the Catholic priest molestation ordeal and the rising prejudice I saw between religious groups after 9/11. This scared me. I lost faith in organized religion. I was atheist.

After this I started to think atheism was too cynical and a grim way to live life. My friend gave me a wonderful book called the Tao of Pooh, and I read it. I loved it and became a Taoist, which is basically like a more chill version of a Buddhist. I got bored of that too eventually. I didn't really no what I thought. So, I became Agnostic.

Over time, though, I got sick of not knowing, or knowing, or wondering, or worrying about my religious beliefs. I consider this apathy to be realism, so that must make me a Realist. That is what I consider myself now. I don't care about where I came from or where I'm going. I'm happy to have this chance to live. But of course, I am taking the Sacred and the Secular, so I must reevaluate yet again...

Intro blog post

2009-01-26T18:53:00.000-08:00

hellloo, Im Cal. A little introduction; I am from Vermont, born and raised. Monkton to be exact, (da` boro) anyway, I am a digital film major and hope to incorporate what is going on in the world around us into that through this class. Although I am not a religious person, in a stereotypical sense, I am spiritual. I believe that everyone is connected and apart of something bigger than simple themselves. take it or leave it. Im interested in having some good discussions and hearing alternatives opinions. Yup, thats about it for now.

Cal

Symbols and their Negative Connotations?

2009-01-26T10:53:00.000-08:00

As we have explored the first chapter of Material Christianity and delved into McDannell's view of symbols and how "the scrambling of the sacred and the profane is common in American Christianity", I've noticed that the majority of our discussions have been placed upon symbols that are hopeful, or inspirational, or patriotic. In truth, we view just as many symbols daily that are given negative connotations as we do symbols that give positive ideals/feelings. While looking for an article to fit in with my point for this blog, I came across a news article that discusses a current trial occurring in Sioux City for a double homicide.
Lawerence Douglas Harris Sr. is being charged with two counts of first degree murder for the death of his two step-daughters, age 8 and 10. Harris' defense is that "the girls had died when a spell he was casting 'had gone bad'" (Sioux City Journal). Harris was a known to practice witchcraft, and was a selfproclaimed Wiccan, and due to the inverted pentagram found on the floor of his basement and the various books found within Harris' home (including The Satanic Bible), both Satanism and Wicca have been dragged into the trial. The prosecution is claiming that "Harris was practicing satanism and carefully planned the killings as part of a spell or ritual from "The Satanic Bible", throwing various religious groups up in arms. Expert witnesses had to be called in to explain to the jury that pentagrams were not part of the Wiccan religion, and that one of the laws of Satanism is that children are to never be harmed.
As I read the article, I found myself amazed at how misunderstood and misrepresented both the pentagram and the religions that use it as a symbol are. I find it unfair that experts in these religions have to get up and protect themselves in our courts when people try to use their beliefs as excuses for committing horrible crimes. Although we all realize that many religious symbols are misunderstood or simplified, such as the Jesus fish example we had in our previous class, it is important to remember that many religions and people suffer from this misunderstanding as well as some people use that misunderstanding to their advantage.

Symbols

2009-01-26T09:48:00.000-08:00

We've discussed symbolism many times already in the two weeks we've had class. Symbols can mean different things to different people. I see the "Jesus fish" as a symbol for Christianity and I see the historical context of it while someone else may not see it the way I do. This can be said for things from religion to flags to simple colors.

In "Material Christianity," religious takes on pop culture symbols are shown on page 250 (McDannell). These show one persons view and that person has something in mind to convey to his audience. The problems is that not all people will get the same message. This can be seen very well in different cultures. Colors are an easy way for people to convey a message. Emotions can be seen easily: red for anger, light blue for calm. Or even things we never think twice about like pink for female and blue for male. For Americans, these things seem common place and natural, but other cultures see these colors in a different light. We use green as a symbol for money and luck, but in Islamic cultures green is a symbol for Heaven. More about this can be read here.

This simple site, while it doesn't cover everything, shows in basic terms that not everyone thinks the same. We each have different views of life. We each have our own minds, our own experiences, and these things contribute to the way be see things and the inferences we make. In order to see what people truly mean we must understand their backgrounds and see things through their eyes.

Religion vs. Gays

2009-01-25T17:21:00.000-08:00

Hey Everyone,

In class we've been talking about symbols and now as we all know symbols can be misinterpreted. Different people might view the same symbol is very different ways. The symbol might be hope to one person and offensive to another. Just take a look at all the different symbols in McDannel's Material Christianity.

Well Just as symbols can be misinterpreted the bible too can be misinterpreted. Everyone is unique in the views of religion. I personally believe that people that translate a document word for word, instead of gathering the general purpose, have the potential to be the most harmful people in society. So....

I just wanted to show you a video I saw that offended me when I came across it. Its a music video that a man by the name of Donnie Davies some cracked out religious nut. So here is the video.....

You can check out his website which is even more ridiculous by clicking here

The simple minds

2009-01-21T13:42:00.000-08:00

For last two classes we have been talking about religion. How religion influences people lives and make them believe in anything that they hear or see. I came from a different country and i have a different way of looking at things especially when it comes to religion. Personally i believe in God, but i don't go all crazy like some people do. Through out my life i meat a lot of people, some were very religious and some didn't even believe in it.

Persons' mind is very powerful thing, but it can be manipulated so easy by the outside influence. The funny part about this is that you might not even know that you have been manipulated by someone or something until you stop and think about.

Religion can be looked as a "powerful tool" that is used by churches to obtain control over people. The good example would be Iraq. Young boys get brain washed with religion to sacrifice their life, so they can be with "40 virgins" when they die. The sad part is that their getting trained to kill innocent people for no particular reason. In some countries kids as young as three years old already learning about God and religion. I think that's a little too much. Religion is important, but it shouldn't be forced upon people especially young kids.

To make things a little less stressful i found this video that talks about religion. It's a funny video with some points about religion that actually makes sense. Hope you enjoy it.

Comments are welcome.

Thank you for reading

-Andrei

Is gay the new black?

2009-01-21T11:44:00.000-08:00

After watching Geoff's Keith Olbermann's post and reflecting on yesterday's inauguration (including invocation by Rick Warren), I thought perhaps it was worth revisiting this question. It seemed to circulate particularly vigorously after last November's election (especially in regards to the vote on California's Proposition 8 which essentially overturned legal gay marriage by amending the State Constitution to prohibit it). I recommend This story, by Michael Joseph Gross, which ran in The Advocate on November 16th. It explains some interesting similarities and differences between the civil rights fight of African Americans and gay people.

But once we start talking about marriage (straight, gay or otherwise), we venture in the territory of the secular and the sacred in numerous ways. How do we define and explain the institution of marriage in contemporary American culture? Is it a social contract, a spiritual contract, a personally defined contract, or something else? Why can the same Scripture be applied to these questions, yet result in such divergent answers? As we explore questions such as these during the semester, I suggest we all read this piece entitled "Our Mutual Joy" by Lisa Miller, which appeared in the December 15, 2008 issue of Newsweek. Meanwhile, I encourage you to think about and comment on your views regarding marriage today--and how you see the face of marriage in the future . . .

Test Post

2009-01-20T14:15:00.000-08:00

I am very excited about taking this class, religion is an interesting subject with much to talk about and debate.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=qB8fPJ6zds8

Informal Post

2009-01-20T12:34:00.000-08:00

Hello everyone!

My name is Michael Guerin. As a young child I was raised Catholic. My whole family is very Catholic, especially on my mother's side. The first fifteen or so years of my life I went to church on a weekly basis. Now I only go to church on Christmas and Easter. My family still goes to church just about every week, but ever since I hit high school me and my brother stopped going to church. The reason for this was because my parents stopped making me go to Church. I never liked going to church, and I never saw the point in it because I would just zone out for the hour I was there. Not to mention I don't believe in what they tell me and this is why I don't consider myself religious at all. I don't follow any religions. I do believe there is a god who created everything, I just don't believe a lot of what religion tells me. The reason I still go to church on those two days is that it is very important to my family. I plan on still going to church on those days with my family, but I won't go any other time, let alone every Sunday.

Mike Guerin

Informal Post

2009-01-20T10:24:00.000-08:00

Hi!

I'm Matthew Milewski and I grew up Christian. I went to Sunday School pretty much every Sunday until some point in high-school. I also attended a Youth Group every Friday and participated in weekend trips. As I became older I started to realize a lot of things about religion that were not very apparent to me in previous years. Things my parents turned a deaf ear and a blind eye to so they could continue their faith with no questions asked. For me the concept of religion is not troubling, it the faces that sit behind it. Our world needs religion, however religion has become such a lifestyle to many that life without it, or lived without the practice of a particular religion, seems very odd to many. When it becomes a scenario like that of a high school cafeteria where everyone is sitting within there own identified cliques talking smack about people at other tables that's when the food fight starts. When things get ridiculous in real life, people get mocked, shunned, peer pressured, and even killed over something as controversial as who's God really exists. I'm not saying there is no God or believing in God is not viable. When people act like idiots because something going on in the world contradicts their beliefs that are written in some ancient text that who really knows who wrote it. I believe religion is a way to pacify the masses, and that's not a bad thing. I guess it just depends on whether or not you believe.

I'm neither for or against it, I guess I'm a sort of skeptic.

I think there is some sort of a higher being or knowledge, I just don't think he's very happy that his son has become a marketing ploy for religious faith.

Matt

Informal post

2009-01-20T09:02:00.000-08:00

Hello, my name is Cory Tefft. I was raised protestant as a kid but never really followed the religion to a great extent. Throughout different times and difficulties my faith has had its ups and downs. I'm unsure how much I understand my own faith and what I truely believe. The one thing I am sure of is that I like to believe there is some greater power watching over us and I hope there is a heaven of some sort after death. I believe that religion around the world has caused violence and death when practiced to an unreasonable extent. I look forward to this class and the ideas that will be discussed.

Cory Tefft

Informal post

2009-01-20T05:30:00.000-08:00

I found the Madonna videos to be extremely interesting and tell you a lot about our society. I think that these videos prove how things can be looked at and seen so differently. When Madonna made her own music video, I am sure she did not think it was going to be so controversial and end up terminating her contract with Pepsi. This reminds me of the PSP ad we looked at in Aesthetic Expressions last semester and the different views people had on the ad and how the ad was seen. I think things in the media like this show a lot about our culture and our views and I have realized they are pretty important things to pay close attention to.

First Post: Religion and its Negativity

2009-01-19T21:13:00.000-08:00

The exposure to religion I've received throughout my life is what I've seen in the world, and what my parents have exposed to me at a young age. My father was born Jewish, his family followed adamantly to the religion, however he considers himself an atheist. My mother was adopted as an infant into a semi-strict catholic family. My father practiced his religion when he was younger as requested by his parents, just as my mother practiced catholicism when she was younger, however they both strayed away from their religions as they got older and continued in their family and professional lives, eventually meeting someday. Infrequently my mother would think in a catholic mindset, around the religious holidays or during a time of loss. While my father still stands on a void of religious faith.
As I've grown, I thought I was religious, but I never really was. I found out later I was just going along with what I thought my parents believed in; and that was my mothers religion. I thought I should believe the same because I celebrated Christmas, and was baptized too. I thought I had it all figured out. But then, I'm not sure when, sometime during high school when I developed a brain perhaps, I created my own personal views on religion. Which coincides with my fathers, simply remaining agnostic/atheistic.
This life-long new belief stemmed from all the negativity associated with religious practice around the world, which I detest. The violence, killings, disputes, arguments, wars, swayed beliefs, and any other ways to describe the negatives from the religious realm captivates my distaste of it. It's hard to believe in my mind that so many people apply their lives and beliefs to a circle, that to me doesn't seem worthy. It could be that my mind perceives life and the world in a highly logical and scientific viewpoint, and therefore cannot accept religion as a means of thought. I consider myself to spiritual at times, but not religious as I don't practice any segment of it, nor profess any devotion or commitment to any other exterior realm outside of my own mind and perception. I just think this way because my brain thinks this way, logically, and because I was brought up to think what I want for myself. Also mainly because the negative impacts that religion inflicts on the world as a whole, which to me is not worth nor equate the good it inflicts. Spirituality, friends/family, and one's own mindset, thoughts, and beliefs can suffice for me at least, the position for religion.
I don't hate on any religious supporter, if that's something that works for you, and is something thats beneficial in your life, then by all means do what you need to do. It just doesn't prove to be anything positive or necessary in my life, as I also see it as creating more harm than good in the world anyway.

First Post- Steve Craig

2009-01-19T20:51:00.000-08:00

Hey everyone,

I want to start off by saying I have never been a huge fan of religion. Nothing frustrates me more than the history of religion and how many questions it leaves unanswered, but despite all of that my parents brought me up as a congregationalist. Although I have been going to church my entire life, I stopped once I reached college because I just didn't know what I believed. Since then, the church my family has been going to for generations has closed, and now my parents are Unitarian Universalists, which if nothing else as reinforced my beliefs that you just never know for sure what you believe in, and are never too old to change your views on the world.

I look forward to this class, and I feel that there will be a lot of interesting discussions, and I hope we watch Dogma at some point.

first blog post

2009-01-19T20:23:00.000-08:00

Growing up my parents were very religious, they raised my brother and I Jewish and made us go to hebrew school twice a week plus Sunday services. I had a bar mitzvah in 6^th grade and continued to go to Hebrew school until my junior year in high school. Since I grew up with religion constantly in my life I still do follow the Jewish religion today. Religion is not the most important thing in my life but does play a role in who, I am as a person. I am interested to learn about other religions besides Judaism and finding similarities and differences between other religions.

Reevaluating My Own Faith

2009-01-19T19:26:00.000-08:00

In my own life I have experienced both a religious overtone and secular ones as well. From the young age of three I was put into a catholic school (pre-k at that point) and for the next nine years of my life I was educated in a religious setting.

Then came middle school.

I was surrounded by the idea of a public school system where religion was considered a taboo subject unless all religions were given equal time and none were forced on anyone else in any remote way. There was swearing, bad behavior, and sub par standards in academics. This atmosphere did not improve much as I continued through high school.

I attended CCD instructions with the public school kids who said that I "should be in religion excel". The CCD classes were boring. I had learned all of the values they were teaching along with all the excersises in 3rd or 4th grade. At the time, I seemed to have a better sense of morals than the rest of my fellow classmates.

After I was confirmed, I continued going to church every week with my family. But I felt more and more distant each week that went by. I was becoming more secular in my thinking. I realized that there were other ideas of morals and beliefs that were legitimate. By the time I was in college, I had stopped going to church altogether.

At this point in my life I was confused about where I should go with my beliefs. So, I started to reevaluate my morals. I ended up revising a large chunk of beliefs that I have that my church may not.

Recently, I have returned to church. This time I am giving myself a way to feel more connected to it. I sing in the choir. I have felt as though my emotional and spiritual being is more attentive and is rewared during the masses I sing in.

Overall, I feel that my experience in both public and private schooling has provided me with a balence in my spiritual and worldly sides of myself. Due to this balence, I have been able to form my own moral code to live by and have a real genuine faith in.

Feel free to leave any and all comments!

First Post - Tyler Glaude

2009-01-19T18:55:00.000-08:00

Hey everyone,

My name is Tyler Glaude. The course seems interesting to me personally after going to a private catholic school for my entire high school career. I was raised by my parents to be catholic, going to chuch and ccd class every sunday. But the more I learned throughout high school the less I felt connected to it. Oh well hope to learn some interesting things this semester. Look forward to seeing everyone tomorrow.

Peace,
Tyler

2009-01-19T18:51:00.000-08:00

Hey everyone it's Brian Kleiber,

My mother tried to raise me to grow up having a strong Catholic faith. Fortunately for me, I would say she failed about 90% with the remaining 10% going to me getting confirmed in 8th grade. I never really payed too much attention in CCD class and was more excited to eat the teacher's candy. I wouldn't call myself a Catholic today, but I still attend church on Christmas. Karma's always been my thing even before I knew what it was; you gotta give respect to get respect. Even though I spaced my way through religion class, I'd still say I absorbed a bit of knowledge along the way that I can hopefully contribute to this course.

Bye

Dogma

2009-01-19T15:30:00.000-08:00

Hello everyone, for those of you who don’t know me my name is Zack Morse. For my first post I was hoping to share a pop culture representation of the secular and the sacred. One of my favorite representations of both the secular and the sacred is the film Dogma. Written and directed by Kevin Smith this film takes a controversial look at religion, specifically the Catholic Church, and several other religious institutions. I was raised as a catholic like some others in our class and that meant going to church every Sunday and then going to Sunday school for the rest of the day. I stopped going to church sometime during middle school. The only time that I seem to go to church anymore is for a wedding and a funeral. Maybe my opinion will change after taking this course and maybe not; the only thing that I wish to gain is a greater understanding of organized religion.
Dogma. Dir. Kevin Smith. Perf. Ben Affleck, Matt Damon, Linda Fiorentino, Jason Mewes, Chris Rock, Alan Rickman, Jason Lee, Salma Hayek. Lions Gates Films. 1999.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jd_0ZChHmY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-cKTmsBbE20

Informal Post - Evan Burrill

2009-01-19T14:22:00.000-08:00

Hey guys, this is Evan Burrill,
I'm pretty interested in where this course is going to go. I was raised Catholic which meant going to church and CCD every Sunday as a kid. Even though I'm not that religious anymore, i still have a little knowledge about the Christian religion that i could apply to course work or discussions. But hopefully we'll be learning about different religions , I was never really educated about any of the other ones and want to know more about them.

2009-01-19T13:50:00.001-08:00

Hey everyone Dan Chrobak,
I grew up in private schools, some of which were Catholic. This has allowed me to study many different religions over the course of my High School career, although not into much depth. I am very interested to jump into this course and learn more about religion and how it's affected our Western traditions.

Take it easy,

Dan

Dan Porter First Blog

2009-01-19T12:12:00.000-08:00

Hello everyone,
I thought I'd start off my first post with a taste of what's to come. Before I launch into any controversial discussion I thought it necessary that everyone know a little of my background.

I was raised without religion although both of my parents were raised Christian. We had many traditions like Christmas and Easter that were religious in origin, but secular in their practice.

I have never prayed.

I went to elementary and middle school in an area that could be described as "white suburbia." about 80% of my class could be described as "white protestant" and many of them went to the same Church. During this period I experienced much prejudice at the hands of the faithful, although this may well be held to the fact that middle-school kids are notoriously vicious when it comes to difference. As a result, I was bitterly against religion for most of high school until I gained several close friends who were devoutly religious and convinced me that not all Christians were as narrow-minded as my schoolyard tormentors.

Towards the end of high school and beginning of college I began to look more critically at the idea of religion and its influences. I proclaimed myself agnostic with the following reasoning:
1) There is no sufficient proof or disproof for God.
2) There is no sufficient indication of God. (Something that has been proven to occur and is proven to be unexplainable by science or any other school of thought)
3) Since there are thousands of theological views and no proof to indicate that one or more is true (or even more accurate than another), I cannot reasonably think or act on any religious teaching or belief.
4) Barring the "sacred," I have since turned to a wholly secular morality. Essentially a more complex view of the golden rule, I try not to engage in actions that do harm to others (I may elaborate more on this form of morality later, as it may require several pages to fully explain).

Because the stability of society requires one to follow rules (even if one does not believe them to be "right"), I have not engaged in many of the activities I might in a void of Judeo-Christian law (on which our society is founded). Despite behaving in a way that is by most standards totally acceptable in our society, my beliefs in what is right and wrong would be considered radical by many.

To prepare the class for the types of commentary I might engage in later in the semester, I thought it necessary to explain that nothing is wrong in my morality unless there is a secular basis for it. That is to say that no religious or societal tradition has bearing on what I believe is right or wrong. This is not to say that I do not practice societal tradition, just that I don't believe that all of our laws and values have an objective moral basis (if such a thing even exists).

Here are some examples of my beliefs, however radical, within the realm of what might be considered "wrong" or "deviant" sexual actions (I chose the topic of sexuality since Geoff posted on Homosexual rights and because within the realm of psychology, sexual behavior is highly influenced by societal and religious influences):
1) Consensual sex is never wrong unless one party is not in the mental state to make a proper decision (by virtue of intoxication, age, developmental handicap, insanity, disease, or otherwise). As long as neither party was harmed (physically or mentally) in the encounter (or in the case of S&M, neither party was hurt physically more than they so desired), no form of sex, including homosexuality is wrong.
2) Polygamy is not morally wrong, provided that all parties are in consent. Some may argue with this on the basis that in many instances in history, this practice was only used when women were considered property or as a sign of status. This argument is fallacious in the same way that citing Russian communism to disprove Marxist ideals is false. While in the past polygamy has been practiced in ways that are degrading or socially harmful to women, there is no reason why it could not be practiced as a means of offering romantic or sexual freedom to those that would otherwise be "tied" to a single person. In my opinion it is possible to love two spouses equally the same way it is possible to love two parents or several children equally (although the type of love is different).
3) Along the same vein as the above, the concept of "cheating" on a spouse or lover is not inherently wrong unless doing so would conflict with a previously stated agreement not to have relations outside the couple. "Cheating" only does harm if there was a pre-existing expectation of a monogamous relationship; what we might have called "going steady" in grade school. However, in our society, this expectation is the rule, not the exception. Thus, in order for a person in a relationship to seek romance outside of the pair, they must first clear it with their partner. If both parties understand the ground rules, there is nothing inherently wrong with an open relationship.

I believe that the concepts outlined above are only considered wrong in our society because of its religious tradition. In other cultures, these ideas might not seem at all radical. For instance homosexuality was much more acceptable in ancient Rome, polygamy is accepted in many tribal cultures, and open yet still long-term relationships can still exist healthily (for example exploratory wife-swapping among close friends).

These things are accepted by some in our society and frowned upon by others. Some people who I have debated these things with over the years have made comments like "I don't know why, but its just wrong" by which I conclude that the Judeo-Christian tradition is so entrenched in our society that even the non-religious still uphold a similar value system.

I open the debate for people to discuss this:
Which, if any, parts of your morality are secular but may have sprung from the Judeo-Christian tradition?

Cheers,
-Dan

First Blog - Shrine Making

2009-01-19T11:30:00.000-08:00

Hey all - Heather here!
The first thought that came to my mind when I signed up for this core class was the fact that I know very little about religion. I grew up in a non-practicing Christian household, but from my early teen years and especially after my parents divorce, my dad worked to instill in me Native American beliefs he was raised on, so my view of spirituality is pretty different than most. That being said, I'm most looking forward to the shrine project we are going to have, and although we haven't gotten the assignment yet, I've already been struggling with what to do for mine.

While perusing the internet, I happened across this neat site on shrine making. (http://gomakesomething.com/ht/shrines/shrine-making/) I thought I'd post it in case other people struggle with the prokect. For those who don't have the time to read it, the most interesting notion I pulled from it was:

"a shrine is a self-contained expression of a single thought or theme".

Hopefully it will be useful for some during our project!

~Heather Ryder~

The Creation Museum

2009-01-19T10:56:00.000-08:00

Hey everyone, this is Dan Merrill.

The Economist article In God's Name wrote, "from a secularist point of view, the wrong sorts of religion are flourishing, and in the wrong places. In general, it is the tougher versions of religion that are doing best--the sort that claim Adam and Eve met 6,003 years ago" (See Course Readings).

In the light of that statement, I thought I'd include this video of a group of atheists visiting the Creation Museum in Kentucky:

SAIU trip to the Creation Museum from Secular Alliance on Vimeo.

If you're interested in seeing more, here's a collection of a hundred photos from inside the museum, along with snarky commentary.

Creationist John Morris has praised the museum, saying it will validate the concerns and doubts many people have about science and evolution. "Americans just aren't gullible enough to believe that they came from a fish," he said, according to the Associated Press. It's much more rational to believe that humans used to live alongside dragons and dinosaurs, apparently.

The Creation Museum is a wonderful example of why it's dangerous to believe in the infallibility of something, whether it's a book of scripture or a revered leader. If you start with the premise that everything in the Bible is perfectly true, and that the Biblical God is perfect in every way, you tend to refrain from thinking critically about the material that's presented to you. Instead you resort to spinning and skewing facts and logic and reason to conform to what comes from the infallible source. And you end up explaining why it was okay to fornicate with your sister back in the day and seeing nothing morally questionable about a God who would send a tidal wave to wipe out incurably wicked people like these young girls. And if you take it far enough, you may end up reaching these sorts of conclusions.