Political vs Spiritual threads

I spread my joy and happiness wherever I go.

 

I stay out of religious threads out of respect. I mean, how is anyone to possibly "know" what the answers are?

Thas Crazy!

 

It's not a bad thing, perhaps a reflection of "Separation of Church and State"?

If you are very political, better not wear religion on your sleeves. By the same token, if you are spiritual, stay away from endorsing politicians openly.

Then again, GWB does both.

 

There is a distinction between religion and spirituality. For example, I regularly post in the "religion in politics" threads dealing with the role of religion in the modern day political landscape. I think it's interesting to debate and discuss the effects religion has on the world.

However, I don't think I've ever once posted in the 'actual religion' or spirituality threads. I find debating spirituality and religious origin to be boring and counterproductive. Everyone has their own set beliefs and noone will waver in them so I don't see any use.

 

I think it's because people tend to classify libs as atheists and conservatives as religious or Religious Right, especially on a polarized board like this when in real life most members would be moderate....

From an atheistic POV, religion would be considered political (the spirituality would be lumped in along with it), whereas the same religious discussion from say a Christian would be more nuanced into a debate over personal and organized religion and possibly about group and personal spirituality.

So when there's a topic such as Pat Robertson's douchebag moment of the month, liberal/non-Christian comments would be offensive to some religious people because of different contexts rubbing off on different people.

If the same religious people take it personal, then they'll fire off on the same topic or another topic where it hits the libs the most...which usually is focused on politics.

Not sure if I wrote that clearly enough....

 

I'm more apt to read the "religious threads" than to post in them, although I have from time to time. As an agnostic, I feel it would be a bit hypocritical of me to argue religious points. When they meander into the political sphere, then that's another critter. I'm usually up for that. Nice topic, MR. MEOWGI, one I don't think I've seen here before.

The Rockets are going to win tonight, btw.

 

I was wondering about this myself because it seems like in the ID threads that the debate was primarily between those posters who tend to be critical of GW Bush and considered liberal by the standards of this board.

I also think when it comes to religion its harder to engage in the kind of "Owned Brah!" dialogue that many posters seem to enjoy so that might be why there are some posters who don't post very much in the religion threads.

 

Hmmm, this is a very good question. I rarely venture into religous threads other than to defend or explain my own religion (Catholicism). Otherwise I guess I just don't really see the point of arguing about religion. It isn't much of a political issue for me.

I also agree that the monkey-poo-flinging potential is much lower in serious religious conversations, and that keeps certain people out of them! I mean, who wants to argue without also flinging poo?

 

OK Mr. Clutch.

Howabout;

Catholics are stinky poo heads.

I challenge you to prove me wrong.

Thanks in advance Brah..

 

Well, for me, I enjoyed posting in both types of threads. However, the political threads became very repetitive with each side rehashing the same arguments over and over. So I just skim those threads checking them off in my head (yup, iraq war sucks, uh huh, libs want people to die, yea, gwb is an idiot). The religious threads became far more interesting because it was something that affected me at a personal level. While I cannot change USA's policies on the Middle East, I can learn more about different viewpoints on religion and apply them to my own life. But those threads also end up in a web of circular logic and hidden agendas.

 

Classic!


And good thread Mr. MEOWGI. I think it's a combo of a lot of what's been said here.

Most "non-religious" types simply have no need of discussing the ins and outs, differences and similarities, etc. of religious belief systems. They've made up their minds already... generally. Some are still not sure though.

And while politics effects everyone, it often seems to the religious types that the non-religious view them as ignorant for having beliefs established in antiquity. I mean "come on, we live in the here and now, right?"

Now... I actually feel both go hand in hand, and it is interesting (if only to me) to note that the UN took an official stance this last major meeting of 70+ leaders in September in NY that "religion" must be seriously considered from now on in global politics as a factor that motivates, directs, etc... something along those lines. An act that raises quite a few eyebrows among at least Bible scholars.

It raises several long since forgotten debates in some seminaries for certian as well. Several denominations and groups have (had) begun to say that religion was now on the back burner of man's collective conscience, and that political advancement of the faith was the only way to bring it back to the forefront. Of course from a Christian perspective, that was becoming known as a "Kingdom Age" theology, in which some were believing that the world was to be handed over to Jesus in an already "Christianized Mono-Theocratic state" - in other words that the Anti-Christ system was just a "type" or "theory" or merely a spiritual event that had no real global control or government, and that a Constantine type of thing would happen again (as in the Roman Empire being "made" Christian by declaration). I find that totally ridiculous personally.

But the statements made at the UN building this past September revived the debates (that most Fundi's still believed would occur) that the Anti-Christ system would in fact be placed into power on this earth before Christ's actual return, just as Scripture has always stated.

So.. politics and religion are really going to be combined regardless, in most, at least Biblical scholars', views.

This is why I believe there is some cross-over in the threads from both crowds, if you will.

Great thread... sorry in advance if a caused a train wreck.

 

i enjoy the threads on spiritual issues.

i tend to not enjoy the political threads. i used to be far more passionate about many of those issues. i'm a bit fatigued.

 

I enjoy reading and sometimes posting a few things to the spiritual threads. I don't like posting a lot of arguments in those, because I think religion and spirituality are so personal. I won't say my brand of spirituality or religion is the best, or that anyone who disagrees with me is wrong. We are also dealing in the world of belief, and not one of facts which is different than the political threads.

I enjoy reading other people's ideas on spirituality, and religion, and I think it is alll something to consider and think about.

I have seen people in those threads say "if you believe such and such... you are stupid." Ironically enough I see that said about Christians more than I see Christians saying that about others. I think that makes this board the exeption rather than the rule.

 

I feel fatigued about the political threads. I realized that nothing is accomplished when people argue politics. They only entrench their opponent deeper in the viewpoint they didn't want their opponent to have in the first place. That, and I have heard almost all arguments for most political issues.

 

i think they are two sides to the same coin. politics is how you view yourself and spirituality is how you view others. someone (claude levi-struass?) once said "everything looked at long enough turns inti its opposite", or something like that.

 

or, as the dyslectic said, maybe we just don't have a god in this fight.

 

Why do aetheists usually only single out christians and not all other religions? I believe most aetheists in the US are disgruntled ex-christians who have an agenda.

 

Is this thread considered a spiritual one or a political one?

I'd like a response before I post any more in it.

Thanks.