troublesum:

Thank you for the sentiment.  But was I gone?  LOL.

Peace.

Welcome back Maani!

Leefeller:

Thank you for your very reasoned response.

Yes, religion, too, has, of course, been used for less-than-enlightened purposes.  Most everyone is familiar with the OT Israelites’ conquering of many cities and villages, in which they slaughtered every man, woman and child; the Crusades, Inquisition, witch burnings, etc. of early Christianity; and the murderous beginnings and Islam, and the extremist violence it has shown recently.  And all of these are to be lamented.

I have never believed that faith-based people have a monopoly on morality, ethics, good works, charity or justice.  So yes, I am willing to respect your belief system, even if I sometimes disagree with it.

As you imply, “fundamentalism” can co-opt or hijack both religious systems and political systems.  And the result of this will ALWAYS be bad, whether the co-opting is religious or secular.

As Stephen seems to be suggesting, what is needed is a mutual understanding and acceptance, assuming that each “side” does not interfere with or denigrate the other.  As Jim Wallis likes to put it, we need to find common ground to get to higher ground.  And there is actually far more common ground than either side generally believes.

Peace.

Reason only as you may want to believe it to be. Abuses from religions and people of faith have never occurred?  Some religious would kill the infidels or heretics, does this mean all religious are the same?  No of course not. 

We have seen blind ignorance used to advantage in order to promote intolerance’s from many, religions and they have been a successful tool for just that purpose. 

For me the intolerances of religion from peer community or otherwise pressures, promotes a blindness that is not conducive to enlightened.

My respect for your belief is easy for me, can you or would do the same for my non belief? 

Must admit, I may have provoked some degree of intolerance in my last comments.  Please accept my apologies. Purple girls bitter comments provoked some lingering past experiences of mine to surface.  Stephen Smoliar stated the words seem highly charged for separation between those of faith and others.  I support the idea of mutual respect as the correct way to go, but suspect some religions will not allow it.

Leefeller:

Don’t forget that “reason” (read “atheism") brought us Lenin (10 million dead, many for the SOLE reason of being “believers"), Stalin (30-40 million dead, many for the SOLE reason of being believers), Mao (30-40 million dead), Hitler (11 million dead, many for the SOLE reason of being Jews or Christians) and Pol Pot (3-5 million dead, many for the SOLE reason of being believers), among other mass murderers of the 20th century.

Thus, “reason” was responsible for the murders of over 100 million people - many for the sole reason of being believers - in a period of only 60 years!

This is “reason?”

Peace.

Stephen Smoliar,

Submit to you that reason has usually if not always submitted to brute force, so you are correct in the potential of widening the communication gulf, it seems it must be that way. 

Separation you mention, is ongoing, because of fear sponsored by faith. Better communication would be useful to one side of this argument then the other and maybe resolved by that side attempting to applying reason.

My comment was in reference to Purple Girls negative experience, fostered under the thumb of religion.

Your comment is correct, resolve will not happen, for I need only apply Plato’s Cave to religion in this case, we know in the end it would be useless.

Leefeller, I disagree.  I fear that reason and enlightenment can only widen the communication gulf that separates the “enlightened” from the “faithful” (admitting that both of the nouns in scare quotes are highly charged).  If we are to try to improve that situation through better communication, we need the talents of a good anthropologist, like the late Clifford Geertz!  Otherwise, the situation can only be resolved through brute force.

Reason and enlightenment can prevail over the coffers of money bags religion, for those who are willing to question 2000 year old fables of sheep herders.

Purplegirl:

To say you had a bad experience with Christianity would be the understatement of the millennium...LOL.

However, you have your history a bit skewed.

Peter had been martyred LONG before Constantine estabished Christianity as the official religion of Rome.  Indeed, although Paul did go to Rome during his travels, he, too, was long dead before Constantine.

As well, while Peter does in fact suggest that wives “be in subjection” to husbands, he also exhorts husbands to “honor” to their wives as “heirs together of the grace of life.” As well, Paul states clearly that “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus,” thus fully equalizing the sexes.

Perhaps more to the point, the “minimization” of women’s roles in Christianity was less a function of the apostles and disciples than of the Council of Nicea in the creation of the “official” NT.  This is made clear by the fact that Paul speaks of at least a few women who were ministers of “churches,” and some of the gnostic works make clear that Mary Magdalene had a FAR greater role as a disciple than the Council wished to admit.  At very least, she was an apostle, and perhaps the greatest apostle; we know that she ministered to Peter on at least two occasions.

So before you throw out the baby with the bathwater (though I guess you have already done so), perhaps you should consider re-reading your history, and realize who was TRULY to blame for the “organized,” mainstream, heirarchical, misogynist, homophobic capital-C Church as we know it today.

Trust me, Jesus would have been horrified!

Peace.

Having Been born & Raised Catholic until Iescaped and was able to Recover from it’s Mind Control at the Age of 9, I know this ‘revelation’ is mute! jesus Mom (Not a Virgin!) has only been Revered to ‘Anoint’ Jesus. theydon’t give a Shit about Mary (mom) she was just a means to an LIE!Teh Only Way Peter and Paul could Gain Influence and Control was to Proclaim Jesus a Deity to the pagans they were trying to Conquer with the Muscle from the Roman Empire (can’t convert them, then Kill them). Peter and Paul Highjacked the Religion as soon as stared moving around the Region, Not to promote Jesus ‘Inclusion & Tolernace’ message but as a way to make themselves Idols having been in this psuedo Deities flock! Peter did Not just Deny jesus 3 times- but for All Time!the ‘holy’Roman Catholic Church becaem Exactly what Jesus was fighting against- the exclusive Heirarchial Jewish Religion!
As for the Women who aided Jesus in his missions - Peter and Paul made them Whores- once again to elevate themselves above the other half of Humanity.So the Nazi Youth who was Crowned ‘pope’ can shove his feeble attempt at redemption Up His ASS! Trying to put another blood Stained Feather in Your own Cap ripped right out of the Back of the Saints who were/are Females?
We have been under the terror of this Antithesis to real Human Salvation for 2 millenia- about as long a Prophecized Ah? Your Lies are catching Up with You- Now ,Lost Writings and DNA can & will prove your Heresay!DECEIVERS and False idols!

There’s just no end in sight to the constant reinforcement of the nonsense that makes up the Christian religion. I guess that’s what it takes to keep the whole gas bag of vaporware afloat… just keep repeating nonsense and somehow, astonishingly, millions will buy it, hook, line and sinker.

Oh well, maybe by the time the next millenium rolls around enough people will be realizing that the “Emperor, sure ‘nuf, has no duds on!”

Bet “Mary of Nazareth” won’t beat “Mary of Poppins” at the box office!

This clearly need to go on a double bill with that opera based on BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN, which is currently being planned!

http://www.truthdig.com/arts_culture/item/20080610_bro keback_mountain_goes_operatic/?ln