[!@#$%!]

oh. i thought it was crocodiles.

[jheii]

It's salvation from energy dependence. That's what it says in the Old Testament.

[chabib]

the incumbent administration are bad christians.

[!@#$%!]

"the only good christian is a dead christian"

[jheii]

Also, the incumbent chrisitians are bad administrators.

[chabib]

there are a lot of little boys who might say that there are a few incumbent christians who are over-zealous administrators.

[SpectralJulianIsNotDead]

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

"the only good christian is a dead christian"

What is funny is that your statement could be viewed as true in christian theology.

[!@#$%!]

hah hah of course

 

[SpectralJulianIsNotDead]

When history channel reenactments attack!

[amyvega]

scientology is the biggest crock of shit. it was started by a half assed scifi writer who was making a bet on how he could start his own religion. the only reason why celebrities are so into it is because the scis cater so well to their 'creative' egos and make them feel like a special victim because of their fame and money. they're all idiots.

[Everyneurotic]

1) remember the thread on the old board where someone posted a link to a quiz to know if they would have been nazis and most people put the results that they weren't? fuck that, you make hitler proud!!!

talk about herd mentality!!!

you guys are either dead set on destroying all religion or backing religion 100%; so are the holy wars upon us? because most of you sound like you would raise arms tomorrow if needed to be.

in my opinion, and by 'my opinion' i mean that this is how i feel and this is the way i practice religion, is that i take things with a critical eye, reasoning whatever makes sense and putting it to practice. i don't expect anyone to be like me this way but sure feels good for me. i am not religious but i do have a religion, and that's my problem, not anyone else's.

another false statement posted here is that all religions are based on herd mentality and shuns down individualism (except modern satanism, which i'll get back to in a little). i don't know about the rest of the religions because i don't know them as well (but i do know about them), but i know that judaism encourages individual mentality and questioning of everything, abolishment of dogmas. that's why people discuss the talmud, the guemara and the cabala (different than the diet fro-yo version used by hollywood "the kabbalah), so people can understand the interpretations and live by those teachings. the problem with a lot religious jews (and i'm around some them on basically a daily basis, but i don't mean all of them are like that, far from it...) is that they take a christian conception of religion as a form of guilt and repretion and apply it to their own beliefs. meaning christianity/catholism without jesus. and i think that's so sad and wonder how much they really know about their own religion

and now, before i go on, i'd like to finish my commentary about you guys being nazis. WHY DO YOU FIND IT IMPOSSIBLE TO TOLERATE OTHER PEOPLE'S CHOICES/OPINIONS/WAYS OF LIFE?! why not just let people be, why do you think you have the almighty truth in your words? you don't! you have the truth for you and you alone. if people want to suffer, let them!! it's what they want

2) there's a difference between following a religion, being religious (meaning having your life absorbed by religion) and fundamentalism. having a religion is not bad unless it harms other people, that's when you cross the line to fundamentalism, that's not cool. but what do you care if someone is buddhist or hare krishna or christian? let them have their spirituality and let them have theirs, unless they are pushing you, you don't need to push back. also, religious christians seem crazy to you because a big part of their creed is the concept of prozelytizing/evangelizing people and have them come over to their religion; they try to do anything to get as many people into their religion as possible (because that's how that religion started and it's way of recruiting troops, literally). they try to convince people of all classes to follow them and if by talking "crazy" to you, they get to speak to other people and convince them, then why not? it has worked so far.

3) modern satanism is some of the crappiest, reactionary stupidities ever sold as something besides the whole concept behind both kiss and star wars. on the surface, after going thru the whole shocking "buahahahaha i'm reading about SATAN!!!" thing, the "philosophy" talks about being an individual and doing the best you can be and not feeling less than somebody else, which is a great concept. "a self help book with a shocking title" as someone described it; but, most people who do follow the laveyan satanism often come as backstabbing stupid people who only care about themselves and think everyone is below them, this being the way lavey intended his cult to be, so they form a religion full of actor/politician/rich people/rockstar wannabes (the people lavey originally marketed satanism for, howard hughes was a big supporter) who just go around stepping over all people they can until they meet someone who doesn't get impressed with their bullshit. plus, the satanic bible gets bought not by questioning, rational people, but by stupid, brain damaged kids who think they are going to learn how to sacrifice the family pet and end up getting their asses kicked three times as hard by the people who are truly above them. and yes, he had a lot of humor to it, but it goes over the heads of most who follow him, and probably even himself.

4) scientology, sure it gets made fun all the time and sure, it's dumb to think they believe in flying saucers as supreme beings who will save them; but have you stopped and think why so many actors are in scientology? if the only reason was their stupidity, then why switch games when you are already christian? the reason is because part of what scientology teaches is the control of weaker minds (which makes it pretty similar to laveyian satanism and isn't very surprising that both got popular right about the same time) and the use of most parts of the brain. they also teach them the power of speech and the power of words, so they can get what they want from anybody (in theory of course); also, they recruit (via iq tests) the most "intelligent" and "superior" people they can, which means that actors will be side by side with the best of the best. scientology isn't entirely dumb and it's not "tom cruise's religion, tom cruise is dumb" or "south park makes fun of it, it must be stupid". yeah it is dumb, but know why it's dumb and why it isn't. i bet you guys would think that scientology would be way awesome if brian wilson or animal collective or j mascis were into that. again, it's because it's "cool" to make fun of it and not knowing why, maybe thinking that now it's overrated to make fun of it all.

in conclusion, i kinda agree with chris habib when he said that all orthodoxy is bad, people shouldn not let things engulf them, but sometimes that's a very hard for some people

[Savage Clone]

I don't have any problem with people being religious if it works for them.
However, I still get to poke fun.


I think LaVey had a lot of great points, and a lot of people who claim to be followers of his writings only look at part of the picture. Personally, I would never proclaim myself to be a "follower" of any established religion because there is always some major part of each of them that I can't hang with. LaVey and Thee Temple Ov Psychick Youth in its early years were the closest things I felt I could align myself with, but ultimately I am not a "joiner," and like I said before there is always something I disagree with.
Making fun of religion is fun because so many religious people make it so easy. It turns people into a caricature and I enjoy laughing at it because I simply cannot understand the impulse to act that way. I would get NOTHING out of it, and I think it's weird and fascinating.

There's nothing wrong with people doing what they do, but there's nothing wrong with thinking it's hilarious either.

[Everyneurotic]

Originally Posted by Savage Clone

I don't have any problem with people being religious if it works for them.
However, I still get to poke fun.


I think LaVey had a lot of great points, and a lot of people who claim to be followers of his writings only look at part of the picture. Personally, I would never proclaim myself to be a "follower" of any established religion because there is always some major part of each of them that I can't hang with. LaVey and Thee Temple Ov Psychick Youth in its early years were the closest things I felt I could align myself with, but ultimately I am not a "joiner," and like I said before there is always something I disagree with.
Making fun of religion is fun because so many religious people make it so easy. It turns people into a caricature and I enjoy laughing at it because I simply cannot understand the impulse to act that way. I would get NOTHING out of it, and I think it's weird and fascinating.

There's nothing wrong with people doing what they do, but there's nothing wrong with thinking it's hilarious either.

point taken, i'm also guilty of poking fun at religion and religious people, even though i never do that to their faces, if i disagree with something, i might as well go and discuss the matters and see if they know their stuff and how stupid it can get.

i wasn't directing it to you, and you have proven me you are the kind of people who really think things thru. i couldn't agree more with your last sentence.

[val-holla-ing]

here's an interesting article on scientology that may be the only decent thing rolling stone has ever printed.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...as-player=true

[SpectralJulianIsNotDead]

Christianity is not based on guilt, but many catholics think it is.

Addressing #2- I wouldn't say that Christians try to "recruit troops", sure there are some crazy televangelists out there, but most Christians want to spread the "good news" (that is what Gospel means.) It is not that they need numbers. Sure, conversion to Christianity is pretty simple, but it is still an individual's choice.

I'm not ready for a holy war, I just get ticked when people say intolerant things, like religion is the root of all evil, and that all religious people are crazy/stupid/unreasonable.

Not to say that all Christians are reasonable. I never really liked going to church that much, because while there are some really nice people, there are always a handful of zealots, the real fire and brimstoney people. Plus the people that think your gonna go to hell if you don't get baptized the right way. There are some really crazy born agains too. Recommending all these self help evangelical books and talking about how great Pat Robertson is. Speaking of Pat Robertson, my mom was channel surfing one day, and say something about some of the stuff that was happening in the Sudan. Really brutal stuff. So she donated some money and they sent her a free Pat Robertson book. Out of pure boredom, I read the whole thing in about 1/2 hour. My favorite quote was "It says that animals don't go to heaven, but I hope to see horses once I get there, because I really love horses." Pat Robertson is a complete nut. I think he is a pretty harmless guy though.

[truncated]

I'll try and be concise about this, because it's a complex issue on which one's stance could be easily miscommunicated.

I don't personally subscribe to the ideology behind organized religion. To establish a set of moral, behavioral, and conceptual "laws" based on information/events that questionable in their very existence is, to me, a total oxymoron. This is not to say I scoff at spirituality - as chabib pointed out, one does not need a prescribed religion to be spiritual.

I don't necessarily 'fault' anyone for subscribing to organized religion, but there are basic tenets of certain beliefs that I simply can't identify with, and at that point, it merely becomes a social choice. For example, I can't get down with Catholicism for a number of reasons, including but not limited to its bureaucratic nature, worship of icons, history of persecution, endorsement of misogyny, emphasis on ritual and sacrament.

This is only a random example, nor am I suggesting that all Catholics adhere to all credos of the denomination. But it illustrates the idea that you can disagree with someone's choice of faith just as you can disagree with a social habit, when considering the motivation behind such choices. I wouldn't choose to associate with a heroin addict, for example, because I don't endorse the mentality that instigates that kind of behavior. I wouldn't choose to associate with a born-again Christian for the very same reason.

Religion has fallen under the protective PC blanket, with society exonerating it from dissection and criticism. I see religious choices more as manifestations of character, value sets, and basic personality structure, and I have no qualms about choosing to alienate people based on those factors. Again, it all comes down to social interaction, and religious differences are just as valid as habitual ones when it comes to divisive elements.

[truncated]

For the record, I know my grammar was atrocious in the above post, but I don't feel like editing.

[SpectralJulianIsNotDead]

Truncated, you are missing out on being friends with some nice people because of your choice. Dating is another thing, but not associating? That is taking it a little far.

Anyways, Tom Cruise has telekinesis!

Both of Natalie's parents are Clear, she says. Her grandmother is what's called an "Operating Thetan," or "OT." So is Tom Cruise, who is near the top of Scientology's Bridge, at a level known as OT VII. OTs are Scientology's elite -- enlightened beings who are said to have total "control" over themselves and their environment. OTs can allegedly move inanimate objects with their minds, leave their bodies at will and telepathically communicate with, and control the behavior of, both animals and human beings. At the highest levels, they are allegedly liberated from the physical universe, to the point where they can psychically control what Scientologists call MEST: Matter, Energy, Space and Time.



So is that how he got Katie Holmes to have sex with him?

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by SpectralJulianIsNotDead

Christianity is not based on guilt, but many catholics think it is.

that's right! guilt is secondary. shame is the key emotion.

sin & hell & fallnen nature & blah blah blah... you're basically defective unless you do what the priest tells you...

[truncated]

Originally Posted by SpectralJulianIsNotDead

Truncated, you are missing out on being friends with some nice people because of your choice. Dating is another thing, but not associating? That is taking it a little far.

I don't think so.

As I said, I don't blanketly discriminate against all Catholics, or members of any particular religion. I'm merely saying that for those who do hold beliefs that I'm opposed to, I would not hesitate to cite their religion as a reason why I didn't get along with them. I might, for example, find it difficult to get along with someone who held steadfastly to the antiquated notion of divorce being wrong, even in extreme cases like abuse, simply because it was dictated by their religious affiliation. That's an indication of a mentality that simply doesn't mesh well with my own, and for me, that's a perfectly valid reason to choose not to interact with someone.