Secularism, yay or nay

Discussion in 'Politics and Society' started by A Cup Of Tea, Sep 29, 2020.

  1. seattlegal

    seattlegal Mercuræn Buddhist

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2005
    Messages:
    6,635
    Likes Received:
    110
    I would agree with you when "atheism" becomes the "state religion." (Or at least it takes that psychological station under a different name.) If religion starts with the separation of the sacred from the profane, then the idea of "keeping the common areas free from religion," is in fact making the profane sacred, and very much qualifies as a religion.
     
    Thomas likes this.
  2. wil

    wil UNeyeR1 Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Messages:
    21,770
    Likes Received:
    1,928
    All interesting discussion. We are having issues with atheists in the US trying to any religious indications from public spaces...i think to our detriment...there to me is a limit.

    For instance the battle surrounding this local war memorial

    Beyond that I'd like to add...interesting ancestry there RJ! Your great grandfather had a heckuva soup strainer!
     
    RJM Corbet likes this.
  3. RJM Corbet

    RJM Corbet God Feeds the Ravens Admin

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2016
    Messages:
    5,609
    Likes Received:
    1,112
    Every heart knows, every soul knows, from origin of time to infinite future ... Imo
     
  4. A Cup Of Tea

    A Cup Of Tea Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2011
    Messages:
    3,310
    Likes Received:
    566
    Ugh. But the board wrote in her favour at least? She was not entirely without support?

    I often ponder where morality comes from in governance, it's hard to sort it out from all the other noise and interests.
    As a non-believer I don't entirely feel comfortable with adopting the morality of a given religion because it it happens to be the major religion and then writing laws based on a sacred text. We have worked so hard for such a long time in the name of equality, and there is so much justification in the texts to undo all that work, to punish the sinners for their own good or the good of society as a whole. That the freedom to sin is taken away from us.

    But could morality have a clearer place in governance? Perhaps secular society has a lot to learn from centuries of moral discussions.
     
    Thomas likes this.
  5. Thomas

    Thomas Administrator Admin

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2003
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    2,024
    She was supported within the Institute, yes.

    agreed.

    But I wouldn't want to say that the absence of religion means an absence of a moral compass — that would not be right.

    I wonder if anyone has ever looked (I am sure someone must have) the question of where religions derive their moral values from? It may seem obvious, but the Decalogue was not entirely the fruit of a particular Semitic tribe, rather the social rules were neither unique nor revolutionary, rather it was framing them in a particular dialogue with the Divine.
     
    A Cup Of Tea likes this.
  6. A Cup Of Tea

    A Cup Of Tea Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2011
    Messages:
    3,310
    Likes Received:
    566
    Based on previous discussions, I never assumed you did.

    Yes it does seem rather ingrained into us, not something other. We could look at social animals and see basic tendencies toward "fairness", but it might not be entirely fair to say that it is the same thing.
     
  7. seattlegal

    seattlegal Mercuræn Buddhist

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2005
    Messages:
    6,635
    Likes Received:
    110
    Do you mean like Abraham negotiating with Yahweh over minimizing the collateral damage from the intended destruction of Sodom? Like Jacob wrestling with the angel/god and changing his name? Like Jesus refusing political power when tempted with it by Satan in the wilderness after his baptism?

    How about the stories about "god" sending "such-and-such" group to smite "such-and-such" group? Having your mind raptured away by groupthink does not always produce the best results. Rather, resisting having your mind raptured away by groupthink leads to less collateral damage, no matter how unpopular your individual conclusion might be.
     
    Thomas likes this.
  8. Thomas

    Thomas Administrator Admin

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2003
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    2,024
    Sorry, Seattlegal, you've lost me here?

    Yep, they need to be seriously contextualised. Anybody today still pushing that line should be challenged, albeit politely.

    Indeed not.

    And again, the tolerance of 'individual conclusion' (other than the perceived 'norm') is the mark of a 'grown up' society.

    I say 'grown up' advisedly. Growing up, as I was told when doing so, is a matter of taking responsibility...
     
  9. wil

    wil UNeyeR1 Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Messages:
    21,770
    Likes Received:
    1,928
    With unity metaphysics ive come to enjoy smiting
     
  10. seattlegal

    seattlegal Mercuræn Buddhist

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2005
    Messages:
    6,635
    Likes Received:
    110
    Morality (or anything for that matter) is refined by questioning and critiquing the status quo, no? (Resisting mara/the devil?)
    Abraham bargaining with Yahweh about showing mercy to Sodom: Genesis 18:16-33
    Jacob wrestling with the angel: Genesis 32: 24-32
    Jesus tempted with political power: Matthew 4:1-11, Luke 4:1-11
     
  11. Contrarian Deist

    Contrarian Deist Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2020
    Messages:
    132
    Likes Received:
    20
    I think SOME religious people who oppose or are critical of secularism don't actually know or understand what it actually means, is, and entails.
    These people are of two types. 1) those who want their religion to rule or at least have some special favoritism over others...and over the nonreligious, and these are of two types...one is hard theocrats(or hard religiocrats..as not all religions are theistic...and not all theism are religious and not all God beliefs are theistic...there is after all Deisms) and two- hard theocrats or religiocrats(ditto to the last parenthesis commment). And 2) those who arent that way but assume(as do the number oners) that secularism means anti-religion(theism, and/or God beliefs...including deisms) or hostility to it or repression or oppression of it, which....it doesn't.
    It simple means a system of govt and law and culture that respects all equally by not favoring any one(or set) over another(or other sets) nor over nonreligious views(and respects nonreligious too by not favoring it/them over the religious).
    Provides for and protects freedom of thought/concience/belief/opinion.
    Nothing less, nothing more.

    Many religious people also conflate it with atheism/agnosticism..(to be fair some atheists/agnostics make the same mistake...as in the USSR for example or individual atheist/agnostics today. Thankfully though most atheists and agnostics...and also Deists and nonreligious theists as well...seem to understand the principle though).
    They are not equivalent.

    And...in a secular govt, state, country, and culture a religious person of any religion as also nonreligious people of various nonreligious views, and non theists and theists alike are allowed to attain positions of status, wealth, or even power and govt positions even the highest in the land(president, prime minister, etc) and even to practice it or even express it publicly and be open about about what their personal faith or lack of faith or religion or non religion or position on theology and cosmology is, they just cant allow it to be inserted into sociopolitical or legal policies.

    That is what secularism is,

    Alot of people don't seem to understand that and have a false negative strawman of it.
     
    RJM Corbet likes this.

Share This Page