17 replies to this topic

[techocian]

I'ma free-thinker and i have a few friends who tell me being a free-thinker means you are a non-believer. After that comment, I'm so flabbergasted. What could i say? I've seen many non-believers who are a specific religion of sorts. When i talked to these people, they usually want to keep the topic away from being "dead" or many "non-physical/non-answerable" subjects. Some may even concentrate on one idea like "I will die when I become sick or old and thats the end of my life PERIOD" And they stick to that idea throughout their whole lives.

Being a free-thinker, I fairly agree on not exactly totally believing on one certain idea or religion. I take in all of the religions that i see and know and respect the religion's thinkings and practices as much as i can.

I don't see why certain religions have to repel against one another.I just believe that everyone is born an equal and have the right to believe in what they want.

If you have any comments about how i feel please feel free to post about it here.

P.S I have NO intention of offending any specific religion.

[agentmax]

Its like what Rufus (the 'apostle') said in Dogma:
"Religions got it all wrong by turning ideas into beliefs."
If you haven't seen the comedy movie, he went on saying the same thing you are. And it's good to be open-minded. I try to balance Catholicism, science, and religions I notice while watching anime (e.g. Inuyasha). If nobody went outside there own culture you would be restricted by your own language; but by seeing what others believe you can form more advanced ideas than your culture limits.

[MajesticTreeFrog]

I don't see why certain religions have to repel against one another.I just believe that everyone is born an equal and have the right to believe in what they want.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

When a couple of religious all claim to be the 'final word' on a god's message, while claiming that there is only one(so there is no way that there are simply different gods involved) then conflict is sure to occur. Even worse, religions tend to act as a sort of group entity, and see people leaving the religion as an attack and respond in kind.

Also, there are the politics of power. Other religions are a threat to the power of those in leadership positions in any given church. It is no surprise that those leaders, feeling threatened, try to end the threat.

[Shogi]

I agree, being a thinker shouldnt make you an atheist. in general, people just need to stop being such (excuse the language) tight asses about religion. Dogma is a thinker's movie. It encourages thinking but not outright blasphemy. That's why I like it. If you cant laugh at religion, you are much too uptight.

[banjosforpeace]

I love that Kevin Smith movies can spark such dialog.

Free-thinker? What would be an alternative, an enslaved thinker? A non-thinker? Ask you friends the next time they label you.

Non-believer? Non-belief as religion? I would need a definition of "religion" to go any further. Some cultures don't even have a word for religion. Are they free-thinkers? Maybe, maybe not. Are they then non-believers?

Ah, words. Ain't they fun?

[MajesticTreeFrog]

The whole free thinker thing is just spin. In general, it is the way certain atheists refer to themselves. It implies that that if you aren't one then you are indeed a closed thinker or some other thing with negative connotations.

However, they aren't alone in this. It is in response to so many (usually christians) asking if they are saved. Implying that if they aren't, they are lost or in danger or some other thing with negative connotations.

Neither group is likely to stop because they both think they are right.

Now, I should reveal here that I am an atheist in the sense that I do not believe there is a god, and I believe that I am a free thinker, in whatever sense people want to take that. However, I think both groups need to stop, as this sort of thing cheapens debate and is a bane to society and even 'free thinking'. It leads to people taking sides, and feeling at war with one another. Once they have decided that they are at war, only conflict and suffering can result. Considering both groups claim to have societies best interests at heart, they would be wise to back off.

[talse]

open minds are actually a necesity to being a good christian, i can't say for other faiths seeing as i am not of them. but as an epsicopalian we see a lot of things, and you have to keep your mind open to possibilities and circumstances. for instance, many sects of christianity condemn homosexuality. epsicopalians do not due to the fact that scientific evidence points to the fact that it is not a choice really on there part and they are born with it. and to say people can go to hell for something they were born with is like saying black people go to hell because they were born black. but we don't condone murder cause that was totally a choice deal. if you kill someone, you better realize that your a bad person and ask for forgiveness before your dead or else your gonna have to go through the inferno.

[tattoopunk]

Just a good old athiest/pict, I don't believe that there is a god, though I believe in the ancient Scottish beliefs of the Pictish, that everthing in nature has a spirit. There was a creation, but not of much religious significanse, there are two dieties if that's what you would refer to them as. They are somewhat the mother and father, It is an interesting religion, praticed for the self. Though since it is mainly about witchcraft, most people would not even consider it to be a religion, more of a sect or covenet, though that is also incorect, it is a solitary pratice, so it is really none of the above.

[agentmax]

Does being pictish explain the tatto/ink in your username and forums? Do you use that millenia old art as inspiration, perhaps?
And I guess if it's solitary then you don't have to worry if you're practicing 2000 year old ideas correctly...

[talse]

if i'm not mistaken, sects are just parts or diviations from larger faith structures. like the janes are sect of budhism and evangelicals, may god have mercy on their misdirected and spitefilled souls, are a sect of christianity.

[MajesticTreeFrog]

if i'm not mistaken, sects are just parts or diviations from larger faith structures. like the janes are sect of budhism and evangelicals, may god have mercy on their misdirected and spitefilled souls, are a sect of christianity.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Just to clarify, Janes and Buddists are in no way related. At all. Ever. Totally different religions entirely.

Don't take this to mean we don't like each other. Indeed there are many similarities between the two groups. However, this is a common misconception and I would like it cleaned up.

Also, if you got that info from a textbook please let me know which one so that I can let them know their error.

[tattoopunk]

Does being pictish explain the tatto/ink in your username and forums? Do you use that millenia old art as inspiration, perhaps? 
And I guess if it's solitary then you don't have to worry if you're practicing 2000 year old ideas correctly...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In a way yes, but I've always been interested in body modification. Its just a way to feel one with yourself and nature, though it is sometimes hard to pratice in a city like Boston, it is really the ideas and the healing, spiritual and physical, that are always applicable.

[tattoopunk]

if i'm not mistaken, sects are just parts or diviations from larger faith structures. like the janes are sect of budhism and evangelicals, may god have mercy on their misdirected and spitefilled souls, are a sect of christianity.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Its terminology has several different meanings, though the one most commonly associated with witchcraft is a group of witches what pratice thee magik together. In a sence a covenet and a sect are atleast to the onlooker the same thing. Since Pictish is a solitary worship and it's magik rituals focous on the individual to cast it is not really a religion of sects and covenats.

Sect has in the media view become a group that is an offshoot srom a major belief system, like the branch davidians, though you could also call them a cult. It's an interesting thing, because all religions really started out as cults and just grew in size, which is why I find it funny when the Catholic Church condems cults and other minor religious groups as being radical or evil, I mean, they forget there roots and are very elitest about there place in the world of religions.

[webguide]

I don't see why certain religions have to repel against one another.I just believe that everyone is born an equal and have the right to believe in what they want.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The reason why these religions are against each other is because their scripture tells them to. All the major religions where built with hatred for other religions. This is what allowed religous leaders (the people that wrote these books) to control their people.

[MajesticTreeFrog]

The reason why these religions are against each other is because their scripture tells them to. All the major religions where built with hatred for other religions. This is what allowed religous leaders (the people that wrote these books) to control their people.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This is not true. Only mostly true. Buddhism does not have this issue. Nor does hinduism(I think..Could be wrong). In fact, it is mainly the 'western religions' taht exhibit this problem.

[talse]

i don't it was so much out of malovolence that they developed this distaste for one another, but a lack of definition of them selves.

see, a long time ago people defined there cultures by not being the other person. sort of like everyone, and i mean everyone was one of those non-conformists cause they didn't want to be like the others, not because they felt like bing different.

like they were defined by not being them. ambiguity intended. you know, so it can be applied to a wide variety of circumstances.

[agentmax]

Maybe not even that long ago. A century or 2 ago, all those politcal parties which were just the majority party plus Anti-. Such as Federalists and Anti-Federalists, Democratic-Republican into Democratic and Whigs... there's more I can't remember, but I think it's fairly common to define yourself by what you're not.

[talse]

that is an inherently dangerous and destructive method of definition though. i mean, if your definition is the antithesis of X, if you carry that ot its logical extent, your end goal is to destroy X. This leads to unnessesary conflict. i always find it so weird when people define themselves merely as the opposite of another person, it's so selling yourself short, to think you can only be a mirror or shadow of a person.