«

[plix]

Originally posted by Yobor@Dec 17 2005, 08:21 PM
All that the word "Atheism" means, is the belief that there is no god. Thats it. End of story.

...and "religion" means "what you believe." An atheist believes that there is no higher power just as a christian believes that there is.

[Yobor]

Look, for an Atheist and Secular Humanist like myself, belief is not an issue. I say "Believe" because Evad and many others say "Believe". The only thing I "Believe" in is facts, which to me looks like:
1(And only)) There is no divine.... anything. No supreme good or bad, no gods, no miracles, no magic. Just the facts.
"Believe" is a shitty word. You can't say you "Believe" facts and have it make sense. Cause facts aren't "Believable". They just are. I don't "Believe" in evolution. Evolution is fact. It simply is (I use evolution as an example and have no wish to get into a discussion about it I have many times before. http://www.abandonia.com/forum/index...topic=3409&hl=
http://www.abandonia.com/forum/index...topic=4226&hl=
)
But I agree with Plix concerning cults. A "Cult" is just a small religion. I create cults in my head every day "Oh, how cool would it be if it was like....". Early Christianity was a cult. It had few members, and to the Romans looked harmful to their society. Thus, a cult it born.

[Evad]

Originally posted by plix+Dec 17 2005, 09:07 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (plix @ Dec 17 2005, 09:07 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Evad@Dec 17 2005, 08:01 PM
I'm not sure what your point to this argument is.

My main point is that you are attempting to exploit the negative connatations of the word "cult" and the fact that you're misrepresenting what the word actually means.

That article you just linked to is a propaganda smoke-screen. From the article, "...[t]hese broad definitions [from Webster's Dictionary] do not accurately reflect the concerns generated by contemporary groups often regarded as cults" and "...are likely to exhibit three elements to varying degrees..." That entire article is an attempt at sensationalizing a generic label. Cult is a great media word since it's general enough to encompass any small belief system but has come to be associated primarily with the lunatic-led groups of the past quarter-century (Heaven's Gate, etc).

The whole "free will" thing has absolutely nothing to do with what the term means. Roman Catholicism (the root of Christianity) was once a cult, for example. Satanism, on the other hand, is cited in that article as being a cult according to the "revised" definition despite the fact that many, if not most, Satanists do not belong to a church nor follow any leader (which also rules out exploitation of those members by a psychotic leader) but themselves nor pose any danger to themselves or others because of their beliefs, the three rules cited as what now constitute a cult. [/b][/quote]


Do you actually think this way? So this article is simply a propaganda smoke screen fostered by the media?


"That entire article is an attempt at sensationalizing a generic label."

If anything, this artical is attemting to eliminate vaugness in relation to the word cult and "the concerns generated by contemporary groups often regarded as cults".

The F.B.I has a classification of religious cults. You know why? Not because they watch the news. It's because they investigate homicidal maniacs.

Saying people should open their mind to the word "satan" meaning open-mindedness and critical thinking, and then turning around and crying about the word "cult" changing sounds a little two faced too by the way.

Lastly, I am not attempting to exploit anything here. When I used the word cult it was totally aparrent as to what I was talking about. Is there a better word to describe a religion that tells you to follow them or die? I didn't bring cult up to associate it to satanism, but it is ironic how it made the list.

[Yobor]

I think cult is just a word, and it doesn't really matter. You could say "Extreme Religious Group" in place of the word "cult" and it would be exactly the same. I don't see the fuss over the word cult.

[plix]

Originally posted by Yobor@Dec 17 2005, 10:21 PM
The only thing I "Believe" in is facts, which to me looks like:
1(And only)) There is no divine.... anything. No supreme good or bad, no gods, no miracles, no magic. Just the facts.

Facts can be proven, the existance of a devine being cannot just as it cannot be disproven. The "fact" is that the existance or non-existance of a greater being is unknowable, hence my earlier mention of agnosticism being the true non-religious classification.

As a minor aside, and while I agree that we really shouldn't get into the argument here, evolution isn't fact, it's theory. I'm not a creationist by any stretch of the imagination and I do believe in evolution, but it's far from perfect and there's a lot still to figure out about it.

Originally posted by Evad
I'm starting to believe you may be Roman Catholic after all. You didn't quote enough to give context. That's fair I guess, but I'd just ask that anyone who is reading this with interest to go look at the source material, and see what it really says.

First of all, that was really bigoted. I strongly suggest that you watch the ethnic stereotyping.

Second of all, I quoted out of context because I was emphasizing the language he was using rather than the points he was actually making. Notice the phases I bolded, such as "often regarded as." They're intentionally vague so as to side-step adressing the actual meaning of the word.

Originally posted by Evad
If anything, this artical is attemting to eliminate vaugness in relation to the word cult and "the concerns generated by contemporary groups often regarded as cults".

It's attempting to eliminate vagueness by redefining the meaning of a word which has existed for centuries. The reason I raised issue is because people intentionally do that frequently to serve their own purpose. In this instance, reclassifying cult to mean "organized lunacy" in the eyes of the general public is nice since that way any small religion -- a "cult" by the true definition of the word -- which a media outlet (for example) doesn't like can then enjoy the negative connotations.

"Cult" is vage by definition, just as "big" is vague by definition. Frankly, I'm at a loss here as to how to state the blatently obvious: that this is misleading and stupid.

Originally posted by Evad
Saying people should open their mind to the word "satan" meaning open-mindedness and critical thinking, and then turning around and crying about the word "cult" changing sounds a little two faced too by the way.

The etymology of "Satan" covered earlier is just that: the origin of the term. It's actually a very similar issue to this one as people associate the term only with the christian entity and have no idea that the term itself is rooted elsewhere.

[plix]

Originally posted by Yobor@Dec 17 2005, 11:25 PM
I don't see the fuss over the word cult.

My problem is that it's profiling. It's sort of like how "Islamic" and "terrorist" have become interchangable in the United States. There are plenty of perfectly reasonable, normal "cults" which are simply esoteric, but that doesn't automatically make them evil.

[Evad]

I noticed that later, and was going to errase the entire paragraph as I too found it to be a little biggoted, sorry.I'll do it now.
My point is that the word has changed, for better or for worse.

[Yobor]

Yes, the meaning of the word has changed. So do the names of all words. 'Gay' has changed from "Happy" to "Homosexual". 'Gangster' has changed from someone who runs and protects a speakeasy to someone who behaves in a certain fashion. Everything changes with time.

I have noticed that society gets progressively more liberal as time goes on.
*Note: All the following is based on the celf-centered US method of teaching history: U.S. History, and why you need to learn that same history every year.*

During the Revolution, the conservative peoples were the tories who wanted a king. The liberals were the revolutionists.
During the Civil War era, the conservatives were those who thought slavery was the correct option while Liberals were abolotionists. Now, this makes the conservatives look bad, but really being conservative is just not wanting too much change. By todays standards it is horrifyingto think of slavery that way. In the future, people will look back on the treatment of homosexuals in the same way. The definitions of society change no matter what anyone does to try to stop it.

[Evad]

Yobor, I am definitly impressed with your mind. You are looking for answers and that's great. Just remember that the cardnial sins are sins against the self. They are not to restrict you, they are to stop yourself from destruction from within. With our liberty we have gotten freedom to do just about anything we want. Nowadays just about anyone with a job can do anything they want. Take flying for instance. 200 years ago not even a king had the ammount of access to this planet as you do. With this freedom comes great responsability, and without some kind of internal monitor I believe that humanity would fail.

[Yobor]

Personally, my internal monitor is myself and my own thoughts. I realize some people get strength from religion, but I am not that way. I'm not better, just different. But yes, sometimes religion is necessary for stability in a culture. But when cultures come together, it often creates problems. Xenophobia and extreme conservatism can start wars between these groups. Oftentimes, a religion of some sort may be at the heart of these xenophobic and extremely conservative thoughts.

To sum up, Sometimes Religion is good, and helps people become stronger, happier people

Sometimes Religion is bad, because it can encourage a loss of self. For example, I asked a friend of mine (15 years old, I know, so maybe it is just the age) about their thoughts on a certain subject. She responded, "I don't know I'll have to see what my church believes" This is horrible for a church to encourage this sort of behavior. Another church, the largest in the area (3000+ members) has much the same policy: We right, you wrong, don't ask. Much of the time they express feelings that you should not ever doubt the religion because you could go to hell. A simple questioning of yourself whether what you believe in is correct should not be worthy of hell.
This is not every church, but it is some.
Some churches encourage suicide bombers to blow up busses and buildings. Plain disgusting.
Other churches encourage "Holy Crusades" against yet more churches, claiming that only they are truly on god's side.

I speak of the churches, but the churches come along with the Religion. You could practice in private, but most people do not.

However, religion helps people get through times of crisis. Two days ago I went to the funeral of my 14 year old friend who committed suicide. Many people prayed to try to gain a feeling of comfort. Another time, my cousin died of cancer, and his family used prayer and the comfort of their church to gain strength to cope with the loss.

Religion is a strange thing.