On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 21:49:37 -0700, Patrick Elliott wrote:

> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Tue, 09 Jun 2009 21:01:11 -0700, Patrick Elliott wrote:
>> 
>>> Sure, there are "nice" people, who don't fall into that category. Sort
>>> of...
>> 
>> You really need to meet more people - if your sample is so small that
>> you believe that all believers aren't nice (etc.), then you don't have
>> a sufficiently large sample size to understand the POV of someone who
>> does believe.
>> 
>> I live in Utah.  I have many friends who are true believers.  They've
>> helped me move house, they understand that I don't believe what they
>> do, and they don't try to convince me that I'm wrong.
>> 
> Try doing something that "really" conflicts with their views in some way
> though. 

I think making a declaration of being more aligned with Pagan beliefs and 
being an ex-Lutheran (I was raised Lutheran and it turned me into a cynic 
about organised religion) certainly qualifies.  Most took it as an 
opportunity to learn more about what that means rather than as a reason 
to react with fear.  Of course some reacted negatively (ironically, those 
outside the immediate geographical area and of other faiths than LDS 
tended to react a lot more strongly - one friend of mine who is a devout 
JW, for example, was utterly horrified).

These days, I tend more towards agnosticism probably more than anything.  
I'm not prepared to say there *definitely* is nothing more than this 
existence, I think there is a lot about life we don't know.  <shrug>  I'm 
also not particularly bothered by uncertainty, though, and that's a hard 
thing for most people.  That's part of the reason some (not all) who are 
religious/deeply devout/whatever grab onto a religion - because it 
provides some certainty in an otherwise uncertain world.

> Reality is, there is almost always "something" that will set
> them against you, if you cross some undefined, imaginary, line. The ones
> that don't.. Are usually a hairs breadth from being "basically"
> agnostics, or UU members. 

Not the ones I know.  One of my best friends here is very strong in his 
LDS faith.

> I.e., they either follow the religion because
> they "hope" its meaningful, and its become habit, or they have a view of
> religion that is so nebulous that they would rather just leap to the
> conclusion that you are good, therefor following god, even if you don't
> know you are, and thus "saved" anyway. 

Nope, my friend knows I'm on a different path, and he wishes me well.

> Nice ones are wishy washy in
> views, either about the religion itself, or if not that, then as to
> their "interpretation" of who is "really" following it. 

Nope again.

> The minor
> exception is a few that think being nice to everyone is "mandated", but
> still share, among themselves, the certainty that you, being a
> non-believer, are in deep shit later.

And nope, again.  We've had that discussion.  He believes his religion is 
right for him, and that my beliefs are right for me.  He and I see 
religious belief as a deeply personal item, and that allows us to have 
mutual respect that we have different ways of viewing the world, and 
neither is particularly right or wrong, but work for us individually.

> The problem with these later groups is that they invariably have "some"
> members who, if they didn't have a more aggressive and nasty group to
> join, would feel the need to "invent" one, so they could teach the
> "proper" lessons, unlike their parents, which means "not being nice".
> You can't hold to a religion that contains the "seeds" for such
> practice, and plenty of examples, and not expect recidivism to a nastier
> version on occasion.

I really wonder what you have been exposed to of people who are truly 
spiritual.  I realise how that sounds, but it sounds to me like you've 
had a slew of bad experiences and very few good ones.

Jim

Post a reply to this message