Beautiful insightsboztopiaApril 20 2009, 16:58:39 UTC
I wrote last year that it's a mistake to conflate evangelism with fundamentalism, but I often make that mistake myself whether due to intellectual carelessness or just because I'm rushing to make my point. ;)
I absolutely don't equate people like you with, say, Rick Warren or James Dobson, or (more accurately) their followers. Evangelists should, if they are true, be doing what you're doing, and inviting others to come along with them on the journey. The problem is, as you said, many extremists seek to force order onto their lives, and can only do so by forcing order onto everyone else's life. Worse, this extremism is often rooted in deep-seated psychological trauma that often springs from abuse or scorn, and so they extend the same hatred outward. That's is what will find in me a tireless and implacable foe, and I suspect you are not so different.
I actually do refuse to work at businesses that are ethically flawed, even if it costs me. I always try to enact reform first, though, because it's too easy to just quit. I don't expect
( ... )
Re: Beautiful insights2eclipseApril 20 2009, 17:37:09 UTC
this simultaneiously clarifies things a lot for me, and fails to answer my question. i too have companies i will not work for...but what distinguishes them from from the companies you WILL work for? is it what they espouse? because lots of churches that have done horrible things have been through a reformation process (including the roman catholic church) and lots of them have members who fail to act as the church's edicts proscribe. i guess what i'm wondering is where is the line drawn for YOU?
like you, i DO consider myself an enemy to fundamentalist bullies (of any faith). i try to be a tolerant person, but there are limits to my tolerance. fundamentalist bullies find themselves right up there with people who commit genocide, canabalism-for-the-fun-of-it(not as a desperate last resort), gang rapists, mass murderers....these things are just not right
also i really love this kind of post from you. you are good with the big thoughts. i also like hashing them out with you. ;)
I have such high ethical standards that pretty much any job that wasn't completely righteous or fighting the good fight would give me agita. But you pick your battles and make your stands as you can, and learn that it's impossible to be pure at all times.
I worked for the military in several capacities over the last few years, and while it sickened me to be part of the government that was run by Bush and his toadies, I also knew that there were good people toiling away in the bowels of the government, trying to do their jobs right and not let the politics destroy them, so I accepted that and learned to be less judgmental.
I could never work for an oil company, though. AT&T or Halliburton are also pretty much right out the door. :)
I'm always delighted when you give me so much to chew on. Your wisdom and insight are among the many reasons I cherish you as a friend. ;)
It's interesting that you use that phrasing. I was just musing the other day that when I was younger, my appetites were considerably more destructive, to cue Guns N' Roses. Now I'm thirsty for ideas. :) I also like it because it reminds me of your comment about John McCain hurting people in the butt, which never fails to make me laugh
( ... )
We need better tools for all of these things--religion is just one facet. Like I said, in an age of shifting paradigms, everything's got to be reconsidered. Nothing should be off the table of reevaluation.
Re: Beautiful insightsthewrongcrowdApril 21 2009, 03:51:42 UTC
...that is people, not religion..
Perhaps you loosely used the terminology, but perhaps not. :)
Religion is people. Any god-portion in any religion is filtered through people, who by nature, have agendas. Religions, unlike secular institutions, are subject to greater abuse of power simply because they (collectively) believe that "God told me to" do $foo, and until the very recent advent of ecumenicalism, inherent in that belief was the belief that everyone else (including other religious) were devil-(mis)lead.
Re: Beautiful insightsthewrongcrowdApril 21 2009, 15:43:49 UTC
I will grant that the "God said..." part of religion makes it particularly exploitable in this way
And thus an inherent difference between religions and secular institutions.
Your example of secular idea misused, manifest destiny, doesn't help your argument in that it is formed on a religious basis. Manifest destiny is the expression of God's will in geopolitical terms. Believers held that the US was divinely given the whole of the continent; it was God's will to spread from ocean to ocean.
I would suggest that until the formal expression of secularity in the 20th-century, you'll be hard-pressed to find any institution that isn't formed on the basis of a belief in divine guidance of some kind. Including and especially your 'classic' example of racism. The typical dogma is that God created "us" in his image. Other races look different, therefore "they" are not God's people and "we" are justified in enslaving/using/killing them because God told us to... especially among the Judeo/Christian/Islam faiths.
Reply
I absolutely don't equate people like you with, say, Rick Warren or James Dobson, or (more accurately) their followers. Evangelists should, if they are true, be doing what you're doing, and inviting others to come along with them on the journey. The problem is, as you said, many extremists seek to force order onto their lives, and can only do so by forcing order onto everyone else's life. Worse, this extremism is often rooted in deep-seated psychological trauma that often springs from abuse or scorn, and so they extend the same hatred outward. That's is what will find in me a tireless and implacable foe, and I suspect you are not so different.
I actually do refuse to work at businesses that are ethically flawed, even if it costs me. I always try to enact reform first, though, because it's too easy to just quit. I don't expect ( ... )
Reply
is it what they espouse? because lots of churches that have done horrible things have been through a reformation process (including the roman catholic church) and lots of them have members who fail to act as the church's edicts proscribe. i guess what i'm wondering is where is the line drawn for YOU?
like you, i DO consider myself an enemy to fundamentalist bullies (of any faith). i try to be a tolerant person, but there are limits to my tolerance. fundamentalist bullies find themselves right up there with people who commit genocide, canabalism-for-the-fun-of-it(not as a desperate last resort), gang rapists, mass murderers....these things are just not right
also i really love this kind of post from you. you are good with the big thoughts. i also like hashing them out with you. ;)
Reply
I worked for the military in several capacities over the last few years, and while it sickened me to be part of the government that was run by Bush and his toadies, I also knew that there were good people toiling away in the bowels of the government, trying to do their jobs right and not let the politics destroy them, so I accepted that and learned to be less judgmental.
I could never work for an oil company, though. AT&T or Halliburton are also pretty much right out the door. :)
I'm always delighted when you give me so much to chew on. Your wisdom and insight are among the many reasons I cherish you as a friend. ;)
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
but i also have yet to meet a fundamentalist bully who is able to keep things to just name-calling.
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
Perhaps you loosely used the terminology, but perhaps not. :)
Religion is people. Any god-portion in any religion is filtered through people, who by nature, have agendas. Religions, unlike secular institutions, are subject to greater abuse of power simply because they (collectively) believe that "God told me to" do $foo, and until the very recent advent of ecumenicalism, inherent in that belief was the belief that everyone else (including other religious) were devil-(mis)lead.
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
And thus an inherent difference between religions and secular institutions.
Your example of secular idea misused, manifest destiny, doesn't help your argument in that it is formed on a religious basis. Manifest destiny is the expression of God's will in geopolitical terms. Believers held that the US was divinely given the whole of the continent; it was God's will to spread from ocean to ocean.
I would suggest that until the formal expression of secularity in the 20th-century, you'll be hard-pressed to find any institution that isn't formed on the basis of a belief in divine guidance of some kind. Including and especially your 'classic' example of racism. The typical dogma is that God created "us" in his image. Other races look different, therefore "they" are not God's people and "we" are justified in enslaving/using/killing them because God told us to... especially among the Judeo/Christian/Islam faiths.
Reply
Leave a comment