Jump to content

Are you religious?


MarlandRulez

Recommended Posts

  • Members

While I'm not much of a churchgoer, my mother is a very active Catholic as was my late father but both have strong theology backgrounds and tend to be of a more live and let live attitude. There are a lot changes my mother would like to see happen in the Church and most of her circle of church lady friends are a lot like her (i.e. most would like to see female priests one day, most are for gay marriage at least in the legal sense, most are for birth control) Her joke about the rhythm method - Vatican Roulette.

It's a shame that the loudest religious voices in the world today seem to be the most judgmental and hypocritical. I doubt they represent the majority of religious/spiritual people but it does lead to suspicion about all things religious, Christian or otherwise. I guess it's human nature. Too bad the real followers of Christ's philosophy, in practice and conscience, people like our Erica, don't seem to have the eyes and ears of the world like those who would use religion as a tool of imposition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 57
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

Great post and I agree 100%. While I hate going to church, not everyone who has a religion or goes to church is a judgemental fundamentalist. <_< In fact, the majority of people I've seen at church are extremely nice.

People are always looking for a way to shoot down any religion. With Catholicism, it's the child molestation going on with the priests. In Islam, it's the fundamentalist terrorists trying to make a literal jihad come true. But these arguments are based on only a very minute fraction of the people involved in these religions and they are blown way out of proportion. If people wanna believe that the majority of Catholic priests are going after altar boys and that the majority of Muslims are trying to bring the Western world down, they really know squat and are just ignorant morons. :angry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think it's a normal reaction given what we're fed by the media. Religious moderates and liberals don't have the press in their back pocket. Until they do we'll be hearing from the hate-mongering types that post their crap on Al Jezeera and the likes of Pat Robertson blaming gays and single mothers for Hurricane Katrina.

ETA: Kenny might have been a little harsh but I don't believe he did anythng wrong. Religion and politics are more intertwined than ever and that means one can't express a political opinion lest it be construed as a religious slur. Or in the same vein, one might make a statement that may sound anti-religion when it's really political in nature. Neat trick, huh!? Now anyone who makes certain political statements will be seen as prejudiced or bigoted (choose your word) against certain faiths. Secular people didn't create this problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yeah, but do we need to eat what the media feeds? Are people truly that stupid to believe everything portrayed in the media? Personally, I think the media is just plain irresponsible most of the time...especially those that are heavily controlled by the government. They WANT people to believe such false views and unfortunately, it's working.

No doubt that politics and religion are basically one and the same...that's why I don't care for organized religion. Religion was created to control just like politics. But to assume that everyone who has a religion or believes in a higher being or believes some form of spirituality is stereotypically..whatever..is just as bad as pidgeonholing a whole group of people based on what very few do just because they share a few similarities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Of course you're right. Televised ministries are already part of the media game and most ready to step up to the plate. There might be a "moral majority" but I wonder if 100 years from now "moral" will mean something different because a few of them have publicly and foolishly chosen to blame natural catastrophes like hurricanes on human sexuality... like the way "Liberal" is a bad word in the US.

There is no cohesive "It's none of my business" voice or "Live and let live" voice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I wish my parents were able to brainwash me when I was little. Because as an adult there is nothing that makes sense about religion or God to me. Nothing. I just don't understand how you can believe in something with no proof. I believe death is the very end of everything. It is horribly unsettling, but when you're dead you're really not that worried about it. Religion just seems to be very very good at pacifying this fear, and I can appreicate why so many people all around the world have developed hundreds of different religions and denominations to help cope.

The fact that there are so many people who believe in different things makes it hard for me to believe in any one particular religion. No matter HOW you cut it, there are a LOT of people who are wrong. Take a devout Sikh and a devout Christian and tell them they are wrong; if at least one of them is right, the other is very wrong, but no less firm in their belief.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I agree with Andre. I don't understand how so many rational and inteligent people can embrace such supernataural beliefs. I can understand wanting to believe something, but I personally find in impossible to believe in it (religion/God) just because it would be nice to exist forever. Wishing something is true does not make it true; just like believing in Santa Claus or the tooth fairy. I don't believe in ghosts or spirits either, although I know many (adults) who do... and not just uneducated loosers either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I don't think it is stupid or irrational. It seems like a very rational thing to do. I just can't wrap my mind around having faith in something. I mean, the existence of something more than what is on this mortal coil of ours would, in essence, be supernatural. God created nature--is he part of nature himself? If he is, then it is merely a mistake in terminology.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

One of the things most religions seem to agree with is life after death. I don't necessarily believe that but there was a big push for commonality among different faiths in the early 90's--- Ecumenism. "Christians" seem to have forgotten that common thread. Indeed, the religious ecumenism of the early 90's even included aetheists and agnostics who shared a respect for humanity.

Now so-called "Christians" have the loudest, meanest and most judgmenatal voices in North America. Have they forgotten the New Testament?

Sorry guys, but JESUS really was a LIBERAL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I don't believe I said that having faith in a supernatural (superior) being makes one stupid or irriational; as a matter of fact, if you reread my comment I implied that intelligent and rational people DO believe in God. The thing about this that makes it surprising (to me anyway) is that USUALLY I think of people that are superstitious as being perhaps less educated. I hope that you are just being overly sensitive and I am not coming across as RUDE just because of my opinions. If others feel that I am being rude, please let me know and I will stop replying on this board.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • I would make Jan, Ashley's mom, Anita and Vernon's maid. It would lock in to why Leslie would choose to befriend both her and Mona. It also gives Ashley a connection to the Duprees and explains how she befriended Naomi. I would have had Derek start the show as a cop to explain his connection to Jacob. Kat needs to realize that she is MADE to be a detective. Have her go through police training, making the appropriate comments about the uniform along the way. Have her prove she is so much more than a rich princess, even to herself. Then, when Jacob's partner is proven to be dirty, Kat is assigned as Jacob's rookie trainee. At the same time, Naomi does finally get a case she can follow through on. Her client is a person that Jacob arrested. This puts them at odds because Jacob knows this person did it, as does Kat, but Naomi only sees the extenuating circumstances and believes he deserves a lighter sentence and a second chance. THAT is when Jacob will turn to Kat in frustration and she will lose her virginity to him. 
    • This opened my eyes and appeals to my logic. But, don't you also think that the fact that they are so ill-suited means that, by soap-opera-laws, they aren't a long term item?  I like how Belle is written now, so I appreciate the fact that she is in this story.  But, I don't believe anything will become of it, and I think EJ is going to mess it up very soon.
    • Kristen also raped John post-Paris with a Magic Mirror.  Her pregnancy was "delicate" and they couldn't be intimate.  She had already lost the baby, needed to get pregnant immediately again and set a Stefano tricked out Magic Mirror to hypnotize John and John thought he was  having sex with Marlena.  John woke up the next day and thought it was a dream.
    • The show is only a few months in and still finding it's footing. I'm hoping MVJ has years of story in place for these characters and will pretty much stick to that plan (obviously with tweaking along the way) I do have some issues with the initial structure. Making the Duprees the centerpiece and not having a male with that name. Making Martin Vernon and Anita's would have solved that and made the age of the character more appropriate. I agree about not having a young couple in the beginnings of a romance. And having too many married couples. Jacob and Naomi could be just living together. That makes the possibility of other relationships more viable than within a marriage. Same with Smitty/Martin. Having them married with kids limits the story especially in terms of them as a gay couple.  The white characters existing in another universe is also a problem. That ties in with the workplace/job issues. I don't think they needed the hospital-instead the police station/real estate office or Martin's workplace could have utilized and have Derek/Ashley/Vanessa/Smitty/Shanice etc working and interacting there. ATM too many characters are meeting up in cafes etc-we're not seeing them at work. We needed to see more of how various characters interact eg Jacob/Bill, Ted/Bill. There were a lot of extended family scenes but there should be more one on one to get a sense of character and family dynamics. Leslie is a great character but her bag of tricks is getting over exposed. I would hate that she is kept on and other character's made to look like idiots by accepting her presence. They'll need some good writing and twists to keep her around. We can only hope some of the lesser actors improve as I don't want too many recasts or writeouts. So it's early days and I look forward to seeing the show evolve. And give the Duprees some staff!
    • Thanks. I barely remember any of the backstory there, just his ties to her parents. It was all so convoluted, everything with Tangie.
    • 81 and 82 were rather bad, with the infamous invasion of the Kirkland family. But sometime in late 82 or early 83, Claire Labine was rehired as head-writer and immediately put the focus back on the Ryan's. This time Labine's tenure was short, but she did great work. The entire show was compelling again -- especially the Charlotte Greer storyline (one of the best plots of the entire series).  But Labine was fired, yet again, and Ryan's Bar was bombed, resulting in most of the action being transferred to Greenberg's Deli, and a focus on younger characters with little connection to the Ryan family. So that is what you are probably seeing from 84.   
    • It wasn't that altruistic. He made Tangie a substitute for Blake and was apparently so creepy about it that Tangie spent the years in between getting away from him and running into him in Springfield believing that he had purchased her to be his child bride. It was only when she got to know Blake that she realized that she realized his feelings for her were paternal and suddenly she and Roger became friends.
    • When I watched 1999 Daytime Emmys in real time, I was like "Daytime Emmys will never top this" and that's exactly what happened (at least IMO).
    • Yes in Sami's case lots of people took issue with her being with Dumbell Austin outside of the Carrie issue, cause she drugged him and raped him by pretending to be Carrie. Austin didn't consent & well Ejami fans have used that as a smokescreen against the backlash of Sami & EJ being paired. It's also not so much as being paired with someone period, but paired with his victim & his victim sister. That's a line that should never be crossed by Belle/EJ esp Belle cause Sami isn't the only person in her family that EJ has terrorized. For all points and purposes since she was aged to a teen, Belle has been a daddy's girl so on top of the betrayal when it comes to Sami it's also with John. He ran him down & murdered him after raping her sister. On top of all the other evil [&#33;@#&#036;%^&amp;*] he has done. "Good dick", ONS with a monster one time is one thing we all have lapses of judgements, it's whole different thing to be a whole bird who throws her self respect out the window for a roll in the hay relationship with a monster & act like you have selective amnesia about his many crimes towards your family. While getting on your self righteous hoiler than thou horse about others. No there wouldn't be as much as outrage if he was paired with someone like his equally rapey Black family terrorizing sister, or Ava, Gabi or even Nicole. So it's not as much as about him being paired with someone period, it's more of who he should never be paired with his rape victim, her sister's or anyone in the family of the man he viciously ran down. I don't expect much of anything from EJ but I expect a lot more from Belle. As far as Kristen goes Brady has been called everything but the word of God rightfully so for being with his rapist, his brothers rapist, the psycho who terrorized his parents for decades, family, the woman he claimed to love after she violated her by using a mask of her face

      Please register in order to view this content

      to pretend to be her so he would sleep with her. Drugging his sister ie,: Sami. If Kristen was paired with someone that wasn't her victim or victims like Alex, Xander, [&#33;@#&#036;%^&amp;*] even Ben no one would really care for the most part. So I hope this gives you a little insight and I hope you know I wasn't trying to be rude.
    • Speaking of Emily, I really wish that Marie Masters could do a Locher Room. I haven’t seen anything about her in years!
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy