I, and two of my brothers, graduated from a Quaker high school in Pennsylvania
Finally, a fellow athlete who can appreciate a platefull of cream-chipped beef & scrapple…
Thin & crispy or thick & soft?
I, and two of my brothers, graduated from a Quaker high school in Pennsylvania
Finally, a fellow athlete who can appreciate a platefull of cream-chipped beef & scrapple…
Thin & crispy or thick & soft?
There is more to Pennsylvania than Philadelphia. Thankfully.
What’s up with people who want nothing to do with religion, God, or a Church to want to get married in a Church? Why not just the civil service ceremony?
For me it had everything to do with keeping the person who is flipping the huge bill happy. For him, it had some to do keeping himself happy (he likes church, but not so much to force us to get married in one) and some to do with keeping his father happy (who’s a religious nut).
I would hav emuch preferred having it in a much more beautiful, less religious location.
almost as hypocritical as all those priests that play with the childrens’ genitals and almost as hypocritical as the money basket that goes around on a weekly basis to pay for the sexual harassment lawsuits. almost.
Without organized religion, the world would be a better place. (maybe I should TM this one 
Without organized religion, the world would be a better place.
I know you’re proud of this statement. But can I ask 2 questions …(3 if you count that one)
For whom?
How so?
Please don’t start in with there’d be fewer wars, less conflict, fewer power struggles, less elitism, more giving, more compassion, more understanding, etc. Let’s not play pretend world.
It is regretful that some religion as their tool to attain power, wealth, land, control, etc. But removal of the tool doesn’t remove the desire to search for another. Some use religion, some use skin color, eye shape, geography, birth status, etc.
Seemingly from the onset man desired control over others and tried to take what another had.
" For whom?"
"Please don’t start in with there’d be fewer wars, less conflict, fewer power struggles, less elitism, more giving, more compassion, more understanding, etc. Let’s not play pretend world. "
So we should basically just close the eyes and be blind to all the negatives that arise from organized religions? Seems like that has been going on for many centuries…
For everyone except all the pedophile priests and those that make money of religious organizations.
" How so?"
Won’t elaborate as you asked me not to play pretend world. Since I cannot play pretend world, how about a better world for all those that were forced to convert to another religion, that lost their land and home due to other religions. Or for all those that lost their lives or the lives of loved ones due to religious confrontations. The list can go on forever and I did as you asked and didn’t play pretend world as this all took place in the past and was not only tolerated but encouraged by many organized religions.
Can I ask you a couple of questions?
-
Why do you know that I was proud of the statement in the above reply?
-
Why shouldn’t we play pretend? Without thinking outside of the box or looking at situations by altering variables nothing would ever change and improve. Somebody must have played pretend world before fighting WWII to get Hitler out of power. Not to associate him with religion, but I don’t see why we shouldn’t play pretend world.
I apologize for my reply. Not my best moment. Frankly, I sound like an ass. I asked you a question and started right in MY answers. Not fair.
So we should basically just close the eyes and be blind to all the negatives that arise from organized religions? Seems like that has been going on for many centuries…
No. It’s my contention that the same amount of negatives would exist, and likely be more freuquent/severe w/o religions. Man (IMO) inherently seems to want to control others and take what they have, and (again seemingly) feels that HE is more entitled to do so than THEY are. Some folks use religion to express the feeling, some folks use other things (birth status, class, ethnicity, skin, geogrpahy, etc). My point is that the feeling/behavior will still be there … but w/o the positives of religion.
I also contend that the positives of religion (Salvation Army, St. Whatever Hospitals, food pantries, chuirches serving the community, etc) among other things are positives that might not necessarily be replaced if religion is omitted (or even noticed by non-religious people). Churches in many communities are the “welfare program” (so to speak). We haven’t even begun to talk about spirtuality and changing peopple’s lives for the better.
were forced to convert to another religion, that lost their land and home due to other religions. Or for all those that lost their lives or the lives of loved ones due to religious confrontations.
My contention is also that people (perhaps the same people) would have been conquored for another reason, lost their land simply b/c another thought they were more entitled to have it. We seem to see similar behavior, if not more severe, in non-religious people throughout history. The priests that molest boys would likely do the same darn thing if there wasn’t religion or priesthood. Rather than do it at church, they’d do it camping, or coachng little league, or elsewhere.
When I look at religion, even throughout the world, I see more good than bad (that could be the fundamental difference in opinion) … and in humans I see cruel behaviors whether religion is the tool or not. People seem to have an inherent desire to control others and an entitlement that they are right to do so … religion or not.
EDIT: That’s not to excuse religion from any negatives, because it certainly has been abused to cause conflict, attain great wealth and land, and to “convert” membership (often for selfish reasons). It’s more of a comment on the nature of man.
Why do you know that I was proud of the statement in the above reply?
I was just referring to the “trademark” comment … that you seemed proud of it. I got bent and made a hasty reply … I would have certainly said it differently if I could go back in time and do it again. I can “Bark at the Moon” sometimes.
You certainly have a good point that those negatives could have also taken place without religion. Whether they would have or not and to what extent we don’t know.
I totally agree with you that there are many programs out there, religion-based, that bring much good to this world. At the same time, there are many others that are “independent” from a religious belief that also help those in need. In the end, it doesn’t matter where that help cames from, it’s the act that matters.
We certainly won’t change each other’s believes on this thread and that’s not necessary. Everybody should belief what they believe in. What bothers me the most about religion is how often religion is so inconsiderate of other people’s believes. And how often religion judges upon others that don’t believe in their God. It could be very well, as you’ve said before, an inherent human desire to control others.
I personally don’t care what people believe in. Just because somebody does attend church or is part of a religious circle doesn’t make them a good person. On the same note, it doesn’t make a person a “bad” or lesser person simply because they do not belong to such an organization.
Sorry if my TM remark kind of provoked a hasty reply on your part. I should have known better than to post that in a thread about religion.
Sounds like me and my ex wife. Neither of us were particularly religious but we still did a big traditional wedding in a Catholic church.
As already mentioned, it was mostly peer pressure. Her family was Italian and her mother particularly, was a devout Catholic. Our choice would have been a civic ceremony.
So where did you get married? In a ditch?
Both times I got married I did a civil ceremony outside of the Church. Both my ex and my current wife are Catholics like myself. This last time I had a judge marry us in the gazebo of our local beautiful garden park. We wrote our own vows which included multiple references to scripture. Basically we skipped the mass portion of the ceremony. Then had a great reception at a local bistro we frequent often. We also only invited family (no friends) to the event and reception.
Hmmm let’s see … thats 1,2 & 3. Anymore on the way? And why outside the Church and not inside and why do you have no friends?
I am very much an atheist, as is my soon-to-be wife. My parents are atheists. Her parents were raised in NZ and went to church on occasion but certainly are not ‘religious’. We’re getting married by a Protestant priest and his service will have numerous references to God and even some biblical quotes. Why? Because we’re getting married in Bali and do a legal wedding you MUST choose a religion. I did consider Hindu, but I know less about Hinduism than about the Protestant religion. And I think there would be implications to choosing Muslim in a Muslim country (Bali is Hindu but Indonesia is muslim) so I’m ‘becoming’ a Protestant for the day. Do we care we’re being married in a religious ceremony? Well, I’d prefer not to but isn’t a big deal, though I expect I’m going to have to listen to my father rant about ‘people believing in fairytales’. The priest certainly doesn’t care, he’s completely chilled and very nice. I look at it as just another step I have to go through to get married, just like booking my flights and arranging the catering. Frankly, someone could stand in front of me and say, “Ooogoo boogoo” thirty times and tell me I’m married and it would have pretty much the same effect on me. They’re just words, it’s the outcome I’m after - getting married!!
Actually, I have a friend getting married in Bali a month before me. He’s from a Jewish/Buddhist family, marrying the daughter of a Catholic missionary. They’re having a Hindu ceremony!
Actually, I have a friend getting married in Bali a month before me. He’s from a Jewish/Buddhist family, marrying the daughter of a** Catholic** missionary. They’re having a** Hindu **ceremony!
OH MY !!! What will they agree on to eat ???
Because our grandparents, parents, wife, wifes parents, etc will all throw a freaking fit if we don’t?
Furthermore i would add that you are mentally disabled if the reason isn’t immediately apparent to you.
**Furthermore i would add that you are mentally disabled if the reason isn’t immediately apparent to you. **
I wouldn’t say that. I think it could occur just because people have ALWAYS gotten married in churches, without really thinking about it.
I also agree that it makes NO sense for a non-religious person to get married in a church, just because “people always have”, “our families want us to”, or “we’re expected to”.
I think it’s reasonable for religious people to see it as disrespectful and to question the church’s integrity in some cases. I guess I am asking, “why is it limited to marriage?”. I don’t see non-religoius people doing other church things, why marriage?
Surely (hopefully), non-religiious people can see where it “might” be disrepectful to be married in a church, take an oath to God, etc.
I don’t think many folks would be baptized, take communion, tithe (I’m SURE they won’t do this one grin), etc just to appease families. Why so much emphasis on being married in a church (for non-religious couples)?
If the OBVIOUS answer is “peer pressure”, then I"m asking that we stop, and think critically about it.
I’m not saying there might not be other reasons a non religious person would get married in a church, I’m just saying you are brain damaged if the family pressure reason doesn’t immediately come to mind.
I am an atheist, I would prefer to not get married in a church, and not have a religious ceremony. I may manage to do that, but there are members of my family that would throw a fit, depending on who my future wife is, her family might throw a fit. Since to me religion is a fiction, it isn’t anything sacred. So I get married in a church, it is just a building. It is not as if anyone present at the wedding is unaware that I think religion is dumb, I can assure you that they all do. If, knowing this, the families want a church wedding, I’m happy to give it to them, because to me it doesn’t matter very much. I have more of a problem making religiously based vows in the ceremony. I would fight a lot harder to avoid that, but if I meet an awesome woman who is super hot and we love each other, you can be sure I’m going to care more about that than the principal of the thing.
you can be sure I’m going to care more about that than the principal of the thing.
Clearly atheists don’t care much about the principal of the thing if they are willing to mock religion yet get married in a house of worship, by a priest, and with gospel being read. I am wondering if you want a priest to preside over your funeral just to hedge your bets or to make sure you don’t upset anyone then?
Surely (hopefully), non-religiious people can see where it “might” be disrepectful to be married in a church, take an oath to God, etc.
I don’t think athiests get married in chuches for shits and giggles…you know, like “tee hee, tee hee. I pretended to talk to God. It was sooo funny. You shoul dhave seen the looks on their faces.”
Re. respect: Given the choice to respect the inlaws’ wishes or respect a fictional character, I’ll show respect to the inlaws…especially if they’re paying for it…and especially if THEY don’t think it will be disrespectful to their religion (what…now I’m supposed to judge that?).
If I had paid for it myself, it would not have been in a church and the inlaws would have had to accept, once again, that they no longer get to tell their daughter what to do…that’s my job!! (little joke at the end there ; ^ ).
BTW, jackmott makes a very good point in that it’s hard to believe that someone would immediately think of the parents wishes. People who think that “the sacredness” of their own religion is much more important that the wishes of an athiest’s religious parents needs to really get over themselves and get some perspective.
To conclude that I don’t care much about the principal of the thing is only rational if you also conclude I don’t care much about my wife and family’s feelings.
If I DO care a lot about my wife and family, then I might also care a lot about the principal of the thing, but slightly less so, than my family.
Do you think that is a reprehensible ethos?