Losing Religion - How a born-again Christian loses his faith

[Invincible Summer]

http://www.cbc.ca/tapestry/2010/01/losing-religion.html

Very interesting.

[Lenina Rosenweg]

Interesting. In the 80s a guy named Richard Yao left Christian fundamentalism and started a group called "Fundamentalists Anonymous" .

http://fundamentalistsanonymous.wordpress.com/2008/04/05/fundamentalists-anonymous/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jim-luce/remembering-my-battle-aga_b_226023.html

FA viewed Christian fundamentalism as a form of emotional addiction similar to other forms of addiction, preying on vulnerable people. As I understand FA was brought down by the US gov't after intense pressure from fundie groups, not surprisingly.The group has some interesting fragments scattered over the Internet.

Edward Babinski carries on the work.
http://www.edwardtbabinski.us/fundamentalists/articles/form_support_group.html

Religious fundamentalists have had an enormous and I feel negative role in the US and in the world, from denying women's reproductive freedom throughout North America, to kidnapping babies and inflaming homophobia in the Third World, to supporting apartheid and genocidal regimes in Guatemala. The fundie organizations have gotten way to much of a free ride. I feel there should be much more investigation of fundamentalism as an addictive behavior encouraged by society.

Many stories have shown how people can be rescued from a life of fundamentalism. Fundies can be "saved" and "redeemed".

I have empathy for people caught up in fundamentalism. Its not very Marxist of me but , for reasons of my own ,I have nothing but raw hatred for the leaders and preachers who have been promulgating this filth.

[Adi Shankara]

http://www.cbc.ca/tapestry/2010/01/losing-religion.html

Very interesting.


I think that most people who leave religion do so on the dogmatic and faith-based lack of thinking involved that may leave one feeling blindly mislead; I mean, faith is a good thing, seeing that it's involved in everything from science to religion, but I don't want to base all my beliefs on magical thinking that was impossible; I think that's why I inherently like buddhism and hinduism better...even IF you discredit the Gods (devas) like Shiva, Vishnu, completely, you can still be a hindu, also, Hinduism is so pluralistic, you can also have the gods in some schools be simple representations for desirable behaviors and astronomic bodies.

That's not to say of course that Hinduism isn't without problems (mostly social in nature) but I've seen very few good arguments against either Hinduism or Buddhism that can discredit it completely the way much of Christianity has been.

This quote by the Gautama Buddha is also found in many Hindu schools of thought, including that said by Shankara in the early 600's (I forget)



"Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it."

[Queercommie Girl]

Hinduism and Buddhism are the "social democracies" and "welfare states" of religion...as opposed to fundamentalist Christianity which is the "neo-liberalism" of religion...

Eastern religions are generally much closer to dialectical materialism and scientific thought...but they are still "reformist"...

[Tablo]

Hinduism and Buddhism are the "social democracies" and "welfare states" of religion...as opposed to fundamentalist Christianity which is the "neo-liberalism" of religion...

Eastern religions are generally much closer to dialectical materialism and scientific thought...but they are still "reformist"...
Wow, I've ever seen someone relate religious beliefs to political ideologies in a such a way. :lol:

[Lenina Rosenweg]

Hinduism and Buddhism are the "social democracies" and "welfare states" of religion...as opposed to fundamentalist Christianity which is the "neo-liberalism" of religion...

Eastern religions are generally much closer to dialectical materialism and scientific thought...but they are still "reformist"...

If Hinduism and Buddhism are the "social democracies" of religion, what would be the "communism" of religion? Perhaps the analogy doesn't hold up this far.

[Revolution starts with U]

atheism is the communism of religion

[Queercommie Girl]

If Hinduism and Buddhism are the "social democracies" of religion, what would be the "communism" of religion? Perhaps the analogy doesn't hold up this far.

Well, this is debatable but perhaps "natural scientific spirituality".

Religion and spirituality aren't the same thing. Humans have always had some kind of spirituality, even during the primitive communist era when there was no class oppression.

Religious traditions in class society is primarily reactionary due to its oppressive nature. Primitive spirituality in pre-class societies have no oppressive character, its only shortcoming is that due to the objective limitations of its time, it was not rational and scientific but rather superstitious. But I think we cannot rule out that in post-class society after the revolution, which Engels explicitly describes as a return to the conditions of primitive communism but on a higher technological and civilisational level, there will still be "natural spirituality", but this time no longer superstitious but rather based on the most advanced ideas of future science and technology.

[Komrad Adam]

Very interesting article.

[Raúl Duke]

Why have religion when you can have psychedelics?

Guaranteed to give you an experience potentially more "transcendental" than any religion.

[Adi Shankara]

Why have religion when you can have psychedelics?

Guaranteed to give you an experience potentially more "transcendental" than any religion.

some religions are completely based around psychedelic experiences, i,e, many religions of the northern amazon and of the southwestern North American continent.

I think another part of my religious beliefs stems from my usage of psychedelics. I know people will tell me it was just a chemical reaction in my brain, but even so...why am I not to believe that what I saw was fake just because a text book tells me so? it was as real as the morning sun on my face when I saw an apparition before my eyes. and religion is subjective, which is why I can't judge other people's beliefs.

[Sir Comradical]

Hinduism and Buddhism are the "social democracies" and "welfare states" of religion...as opposed to fundamentalist Christianity which is the "neo-liberalism" of religion...

Eastern religions are generally much closer to dialectical materialism and scientific thought...but they are still "reformist"...

Ohh please. Religious movements are maleable enough to support/oppose a wide range of political ideologies. There were fascistic Catholic movements out there but also liberation theology Catholicism which sides with the poor. Point is, religion can be moulded around anything. Same with Hinduism and Buddhism.

[Queercommie Girl]

Ohh please. Religious movements are maleable enough to support/oppose a wide range of political ideologies. There were fascistic Catholic movements out there but also liberation theology Catholicism which sides with the poor. Point is, religion can be moulded around anything. Same with Hinduism and Buddhism.

Generally speaking however eastern religions are less reactionary.

Nevertheless fundamentally speaking all religions are reactionary, and indeed one of the long-term goals of communism is the termination of superstitious religious beliefs, though not through attacking them directly, but by transforming the socio-economic conditions on which religions emerge.

Religions are not only reactionary because of their political orientation, but also because they are fundamentally anti-science and anti-critical thinking, this is true even for tendencies like liberation theology. There has never been a religious tradition, whether eastern or western, that does not to a significant extent base itself on some article of blind faith with no rational basis.

Strategically socialists can ally with left religious movements for short-term goals, but socialists should never be converted to any religions themselves.

[Raúl Duke]

I think another part of my religious beliefs stems from my usage of psychedelics. I know people will tell me it was just a chemical reaction in my brain, but even so...why am I not to believe that what I saw was fake just because a text book tells me so?

Well, I do view it as part of the brain. But that's the cool thing; the cool "self-discovery" thing. Plus observing and thinking under the influence is interesting.

I find psychedelics to create an altered perspective that is much more sensitive to subtle cues, allows for the exploration of certain thoughts in an interesting, emotional, and potentially valid/meaningful manner, and perhaps it can reveal a certain "level of reality" (perhaps not the right word, but this ties back to being more sensitive to subtle cues) that our cognitive filters/etc block out. All this besides the visuals, I've not yet made much sense of the visuals of 2c-i.

[ed miliband]

Hinduism and Buddhism are the "social democracies" and "welfare states" of religion...as opposed to fundamentalist Christianity which is the "neo-liberalism" of religion...

Eastern religions are generally much closer to dialectical materialism and scientific thought...but they are still "reformist"...


What about the caste system in India? Forgive me if I'm incorrect, but isn't that upheld by Hinduism?

[Queercommie Girl]

What about the caste system in India? Forgive me if I'm incorrect, but isn't that upheld by Hinduism?

I said fundamentally speaking all religions are reactionary.

However, it has to be said that even taking into consideration the caste system and the like, peasants in feudal India generally lived better than peasants in feudal Europe. Asian feudalism was more progressive and advanced than European feudalism. There is a reason why the European Middle Ages are referred to as the Dark Ages. But it is precisely because of the relative backwardness of feudal Europe that capitalism emerged first in the West. (A capitalist version of Lenin's "weakest link" idea)

Capitalist Europe was somewhat different but by the capitalist era atheism and secularism was already gaining ground against religion.

[Sir Comradical]

Generally speaking however eastern religions are less reactionary.

Nevertheless fundamentally speaking all religions are reactionary, and indeed one of the long-term goals of communism is the termination of superstitious religious beliefs, though not through attacking them directly, but by transforming the socio-economic conditions on which religions emerge.

Religions are not only reactionary because of their political orientation, but also because they are fundamentally anti-science and anti-critical thinking, this is true even for tendencies like liberation theology. There has never been a religious tradition, whether eastern or western, that does not to a significant extent base itself on some article of blind faith with no rational basis.

Strategically socialists can ally with left religious movements for short-term goals, but socialists should never be converted to any religions themselves.

My point is that whether they are eastern faiths or semitic faiths of whatever, they're about as good as the people who practice them. As for ideology, I don't know, I think the Hindu concepts of sin and rebirth were produced to justify the existing caste system.