Religion

I consider the Christian religion to be utter myth. Yet I hold the Protestant denominations in extremely high esteem.

I think the Catholic branch does more harm than good. The religion of Muhammad is myth and nonsense and does more harm than even Catholicism.

Hinduism is myth and mostly nonsense though it, in its pure form, comes closer to “God” than anything the Christians and Muslims have dreamed up.

Even closer to “God” is Buddhism, which has become wrapped in much myth and nonsense too, but the focus on meditation lifts it to a higher level.

And Buddhists do not proselytize, to their credit.

You can have a very personal relationship with “God” if you go into a cave or monastery and concentrate for decades. Few people are capable of such work.

Or the deserving can get a peek with plantas sagradas, sacred plants. Exceptional people have succeeded by pure meditation.

I hold Protestants in high esteem because I like their work ethic and moral values. The Protestant churches are what made America great back when it was great. It is less great today, and that is because Protestant values are vanishing.

The Judeo-Christian Ethic: This term, apparently popularized by President Eisenhower, recognizes the connection between Jews and Christians.

I lump Jews in primarily with Protestant clan.

I tend to think of Jews as Protestants with a heightened business sense.

29 thoughts on “Religion”

  1. Careful about stepping on that third rail, old man. The church folk can be good and bad — same as any social organization.

    Like

    1. Norm: How right you are, and it’s the rotten eggs that give religion a bad name. Some religions tend to overdo more than others. Buddhists almost invariably mind their own business, and I never heard of Zoroastrians or Taoists stirring up trouble either.

      Like

  2. Thank you for not debasing my sacred church of Galactic Confederacy!
    If you make a sizable spiritual donation, I may bring you to one of our general assemblies and let you experience bliss on earth.

    Like

    1. Tancho: Speaking of bliss on earth, I was sitting out in the yard an hour ago, the big umbrella shielding me from direct sunlight in today’s blue and cool sky, with my feet up on the table, watching the birds and butterflies. It was pretty blissful.

      Like

  3. “Human decency and morality are not derived from religion…in fact they precede it.” – Christopher Hitchens

    Like

    1. Charles: I agree with that quote from the recently departed, atheistic, leftist, chain-smoking, booze-swilling collectivist icon if he means by precede that decency and morality can exist apart from religion.

      But decency and morality are also often intertwined with organized religions. One can be decent and moral with religion or without religion.

      I like the religions that mind their own business. Those that do not mind their own business often cause problems.

      Like

  4. I tend to think of Jews as Protestants with a heightened business sense.

    Your line reminded me of one of my favorite lines from the play, The Man in the Glass Booth. At one point, the Jewish millionaire tells his black Christian driver: “A Christian is just a nervous Jew who thinks he’s bought himself an ‘A number 1’ insurance policy.”

    The hyphen in “Judeo-Christian Ethic” is a two-way bridge. With an emphasis that we live a just life with one another. The fact that some adherents do not live up to the ideal is sad. But it does not demean the ideal.

    I understand that Hitchens drove around in a cart with the horse behind. Sounds about right to me.

    Like

  5. The interesting thing about all this religious ending speculations is we all will find out the truth in the end – and at least then we will all be in agreement – that in itself could be a little bit of heaven 😉

    Like

  6. Yes, sometimes I am pleasantly surprised by Protestants. Like in this case where they passed a motion that I totally support:

    “Members of the United Church of Canada, the country’s largest Protestant denomination, voted Wednesday to affirm a controversial motion supporting a boycott of goods produced in Israeli settlements on the West Bank and in East Jerusalem.”

    Like

      1. Croft: I support civil unions. Best to dodge the marriage word in order to not stir up conservatives. Civil unions would give gays most everything a marriage does, but adopting children should be verboten. Kids don’t want to be involved in social experiments and/or trailblazing. They embrace the normal with a passion. So: Civil unions, sí. Adoption, no.

        As for your Canadian protestants allowing women to take leadership roles in the church: Well, duh! Too bad your Muslim friends won’t do that.

        Like

          1. Croft: True, the Catholics need some improvement in that area, but at least Catholic women are allowed to drive, walk on the street alone, and without a head sheet at that, and the more extreme Catholics don’t fly airliners into tall buildings to kill thousands of infidels.

            Your beloved Muslims do all that.

            So, your Catholic comment is just another red herring.

            Like

        1. If you care to do a little reading about the differences between civil unions and marriage this article covers it pretty well, There are many things married people get that civil unions do not guarantee. These include immigration rights, the ability to file joint taxes and hundreds of other government benefits.

          http://lesbianlife.about.com/cs/wedding/a/unionvmarriage.htm

          In one infamous case the partner of a lesbian woman killed in the stage collapse at the Sugarland concert was refused the right to claim her partners body for burial.

          As far as adopting, there have been numerous studies (even those paid for by the hate groups) showing a child does equally as well in any two parent homes. The sex, colour or religion of the two parents matters little. A child is better off with two loving parents than in the foster program or with a single parent. I think any kid would rather have two loving dads (or moms) than a history of sixteen foster homes.

          Like

          1. Croft: I will grant that problems exist in the civil-union thing. It’s a relatively new concept in the long course of history. I imagine it will always be a good bit different than legal marriage. Everybody does not always get what they want. And everybody is not equal.

            Don’t know about the Sugarland case but, from how you describe it, the girlfriend thought she should automatically be granted family status on the demise of her lover. Doesn’t work that way.

            And you can cite “studies” till the cows come home saying children living with same-sex parents do as well as children in traditional homes with a real mother and father, but you’ll never convince me. Sorry.

            Like

    1. Croft: Maybe it would be best for Israelis not to try to expand. But then again, they sure put land to better use than the Arabs do. And they don’t make women second-class citizens. It’s always a hoot that Lefties support the woman-oppressing, despot-embracing Muslims.

      Like

      1. The good christians of one country I can think of used to lynch black boys for even looking at a white girl. Not that long ago in the overall scope of things and the white sheeted KKK carried obvious religious overtones.

        Hatred and ranting against one religion over another is unhealthy and leads crazy folk to confuse a Sikh Gurdwara for a Muslum Mosque and to then exercise their “right to bear arms” by killing a bunch of Sikhs who actually had nothing to do with 9/11.

        I do not think any religion can claim much superiority over any other The possible exception are the Buddhists who would not harm a flea.

        Myself, I hold all religions in equal disdain. People who use their fake religious superiority to justify oppressing others are another story. I hold them in great disdain.

        Like

  7. Being raised Catholic, I am qualified to make this statement.

    “Catholics introduced diving into soccer”

    Think about it.

    Like

    1. Señor Bautista: I have given it some thought, and I don’t get it in the slightest. It is quite possible that I don’t get it because I know absolutely nothing about soccer, or any team sport for that matter.

      If you would like to clarify, the forum is still open. And thanks for the feedback, all of which I appreciate.

      Like

      1. Don’t understand soccer….and you call yourself a Mexican 🙂

        I hope someone else can chime in here because trying to explain diving to a non understander is like trying to describe a color to a blind man so here it goes…

        When you watch a soccer game, there will be a situation where a person will fall to the ground as if shot with a high powered rifle from long distance, grab a lower appendage or perhaps their face with much conviction, and writhe around on the ground in agony until a decision is made in their favor. An attempt at sympathy. Then after the decision is rendered in their favor, snap to their feet like nothing happened. If a decision is NOT rendered in their favor, then the acting will resume for @30 seconds more until the player overplays their hand and has to be carted off the field or if they believe no one is looking at them anymore, they will quietly get to their feet under their own power. Without an Oscar, of course.

        That is diving.

        Go on Youtube and enter ‘soccer’ and ‘diving’. Plenty of examples that fit the above description.

        Most prevalent on teams, league, players which originate from a country where Roman Catholicism is the major religion.

        For example: There is little or no diving in the English or German leagues or from English or German born players. There is a lot of diving in SOB (south of the border), Italian, Spanish and Portuguese leagues.

        And it is ‘Arny’ BTW. Love your blog.

        Like

        1. Arny: I do call myself a Mexican, and I can show you the passport to prove it, but I am a half-assed Mexican, and I’ve only been that for seven years.

          I was raised wrong. My old man was too busy boozing during his waking hours to do his fatherly duty and steer the young and malleable me toward a healthy obsession with ball-throwing (and kicking) sports.

          In my entire life, I have never seen an entire soccer or baseball game. I have seen entire football and basketball games, but only because I was in the junior high marching band, sax and clarinet. Since junior high? Not one.

          Thus, I attained manhood caring not a bit about any of it, to this day. This, to a large degree, makes it virtually impossible for most men to communicate with me because men, as you know, are interested only in sports and women. I can talk about women, but most men are interested more in sports than in women, which is unfortunate for them.

          Now back to diving and soccer. You have enlightened me. That this absurdity takes place primarily in the Catholic world does not surprise me. We do drama quite well.

          Thanks for the compliment. Feel free to comment in the future.

          Like

        2. Arny, no big explanation needed — all you had to do is point at Maradonna, the greatest Latino actor since Cantinflas! ‘Nuf said?!
          Dan in NC

          Like

  8. Felipe, as you have shown yourself to be an enlightened, erudite individual over the years, Please consider the church of the fsm as a viable alternative to the mainstream organizations. Pastafarianism rocks! R’amen!
    Dan in NC

    Like

      1. Pastafarianism: a new religion that worships Flying Spaghetti Monster (fsm), initially created to protest the Kansas State School Board’s decision to teach “Intelligent Design” in schools.

        Like

Comments are closed.