Nothing Personal

[irked_indeed]

Reading this tweet finally crystallized an essay I've been meaning to write after a couple of recent conversations.

Namely: why, to so many liberal Americans, is politics such an intensely personal matter?

Comments

[arcticwolf489]

I think part of that is that the louder demographic-celebrities (and writers or other sorts of mini-celebrities that you or I might follow), young computer professionals (who can Googlebomb and develop infographics and informative websites), the majority of news networks, &c-tend to fall under the liberal demographics. More conservative venues (including churches) will probably be more likely to tell you that the liberals are destroying America (or whatever

[jd3000]

Atheism isn't a religion simply by definition. I'd be careful about Islam and Mormonism, because that seems like factionalism. Scientology is a special case simply because we have written testimony by the person who brought it about declaring it was never a true religion.

-JD

[irked_indeed]

Atheism isn't a religion simply by definition.

That's... not actually true, either by dictionary definition or legal precedent.

What you seem to be saying here is that there is some property of Scientology that allows it to be treated as a meaningful factor. It doesn't particularly matter what that property is - the acknowledgement that such a property is possible is enough to say that religion is potentially a legitimate factor in evaluating a candidate.

Which makes perfect sense. If I know that Senator Bob follows the Eat the Hearts of the Innocent religion, even if I am not aware of any specific incidents in which he has eaten the hearts of the innocent, you can be darned sure that's going to affect my willingness to vote for him. Like Alli noted, the religion a person chooses to follow is part of who that person is.

[jd3000]

Not true by dictionary definition? Here's Webster's.

Religion: a : the state of a religious
b (1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
2 : a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
3 archaic : scrupulous conformity : conscientiousness
4: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

Antonyms: atheism, godlessness
---
Atheism: archaic : ungodliness, wickedness
2 a : a disbelief in the existence of deity
b : the doctrine that there is no deity
---

If there is a detrimental property to Scientology, it is unrelated to the fact it is disguised as a religion, and more to do with the fact that it is in practice a scam. They could say it was a philosophy or a book club, it'd still have that property regardless of what they call it.

Also, what legal precedents set atheism as a religion?

-JD

[irked_indeed]

Not true by dictionary definition? Here's Webster's.

1b(2), 1b(3), and 4 can all accurately describe atheism. Cf. Dictionary.com: "a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe."

(Now, it goes on to note that this is especially true for religions with a deity, but it's not limited to that.)

Also, what legal precedents set atheism as a religion?

Arguably Torcaso v. Watkins: "Among religions in this country which do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the existence of God are Buddhism, Taoism, Ethical Culture, Secular Humanism and others."

See also James J. Kaufman, v. Gary R. McCaughtry. See also Wikipedia - atheism counts as a religion to satisfy the "free exercise" clause.

[jd3000]

Commitment or devotion to religious faith can also include atheism? Also I don't see a 1b(3). A cause held to with ardor, possibly, but atheism doesn't need to be a cause unto itself. Also, "a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe" is not a dead-on definition. Atheism is *one belief* concerning the nature of the universe only, not the cause or purpose.

Secular humanism =/= atheism. Also, SCOTUS classed atheism as deserving equal rights as religions, but *not* a religion.

-JD

[irked_indeed]

Commitment or devotion to religious faith can also include atheism?

Yes, precisely - look at the definition of "religious." Atheism is commitment to a non-divine religious faith - faith that there is no God.

Also I don't see a 1b(3)

Whoops, my goof. I meant to reference 1b(2), 2, and 4.

Also, "a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe" is not a dead-on definition. Atheism is *one belief* concerning the nature of the universe only, not the cause or purpose.

The claim that there is no God implies beliefs about the cause and purpose of the universe, i.e., that it doesn't exist because of or for the sake of a divine being, that the claims of all other religions are wrong, etc. There's a bundle of necessarily related beliefs there - I think there's pretty clearly room to count atheism under these auspices.

Secular humanism =/= atheism.Heh. We feel that way about some of our denominations, too

[jd3000]

Atheism is not a faith for all, for many it is a belief. Not complete and utter assurance, but acceptance of what is believed to be true. Also I seriously doubt belief there is no God can realistically answer *anything* about the universe, cannot one disbelieve both the existence of a Creator and currently-held scientific theories on the nature of the universe?

I don't know, I think it's entirely possible to believe in God and be a secular humanist, why wouldn't it be? SHism is about the fact that goodness is possible without God, not that God does not therefore exist.

Also, one court case deciding legal protection hardly classifies something probably as old as humanity itself. If one court case in 1850 decided Baptists held no valid religion, would it be so?

-JD

[irked_indeed]

Atheism is not a faith for all, for many it is a belief. Not complete and utter assurance, but acceptance of what is believed to be true.

I think you're drawing a distinction that doesn't really exist, there. It's fair to refer to what you're describing as both a faith and a belief - beliefs are just things that we have faith in, to one degree or another!

Also I seriously doubt belief there is no God can realistically answer *anything* about the universe, cannot one disbelieve both the existence of a Creator and currently-held scientific theories on the nature of the universe?

Sure. That says that atheism doesn't restrict you to one single set of beliefs - it just restricts you to some subset of all possible beliefs. Which one could also say of, for instance, Christianity or Islam.

So, again, not a distinction!

I don't know, I think it's entirely possible to believe in God and be a secular humanist, why wouldn't it be?That's, I think, what the "secular" part is for. From Wikipedia: SH is based on "specifically rejecting

[irked_indeed]

If there is a detrimental property to Scientology, it is unrelated to the fact it is disguised as a religion, and more to do with the fact that it is in practice a scam. They could say it was a philosophy or a book club, it'd still have that property regardless of what they call it.

That's fine. It still establishes exactly the same truth: a thing which happens to be a religion can be a valid factor in considering a candidate. Thus, religion is a valid factor in considering a candidate.

You say, effectively, "It doesn't matter that Scientology is a religion," and that's exactly the point: it's a factor in the candidate, and that it's a factor that happens to be a religion doesn't change anything about whether it should be part of evaluating him. In the same way, a candidate's apparent belief in Christianity/Islam/Buddhism/atheism/FSMism is a factor, and that it's a factor that happens to be a religion is irrelevant.

(I mean, again, is membership in the Church of Our Lady of Devouring Your Neighbor's Still-Beating Heart not