First and foremost, I am an atheist, so I have no preference between Latter-day Saints and Dianetic Auditing. I think they are both... dubious.
However, both are recognised religions founded in the USA. Furthermore, they both have adherents who are immensely powerful.
My initial question is.... why?
I have read much by L. Ron Hubbard, and it is... rudimentary (his science fiction as well as his 'religion'). I have also, recently, read the Book of Morman and found it... peculiar, and I believe I am familiar with the peculiar; I'm a lapsed Catholic.
Then I found out that potential POTUS Mitt Romney was a Mormon missionary in France, and I confess that if my jaw was made of glass. it would have shattered as it hit the floor..
So, another question; is belief, any belief, a necessary measure of personal integrity?
Is Mormonism, or Scientology, preferable to Atheism? And to whom?
Mormonism vs Scientology
-
Ghân-buri-Ghân
- Posts: 602
- Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2010 9:31 pm
- Location: Evading prying eyes
Mormonism vs Scientology
tenebris lux
My view of the matter was first articulated when JFK was running. I have not changed my view but am not going to express it here as I always wind up being smited. (Smitten sounds too much like fun.)
Nonetheless, I think that religion has taken on a far greater importance in American politics than it did in 1960. That importance has been carefully and systematically increased, IMHO.
It is what it is. The fact that a self-identified as devout temple-going Mormon is a serious contender for a serious nomination says all that needs to be said.
Nonetheless, I think that religion has taken on a far greater importance in American politics than it did in 1960. That importance has been carefully and systematically increased, IMHO.
It is what it is. The fact that a self-identified as devout temple-going Mormon is a serious contender for a serious nomination says all that needs to be said.
Dig deeper.
-
Ghân-buri-Ghân
- Posts: 602
- Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2010 9:31 pm
- Location: Evading prying eyes
-
axordil
- Pleasantly Twisted
- Posts: 8999
- Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 7:35 pm
- Location: Black Creek Bottoms
- Contact:
Rational expression doesn't lend itself to sloganeering and sound bites.
We like to think we are rational creatures. In truth, we are raging bundles of irrational contradictions and habits ingrained from infancy battling it out beneath a veneer of rationality. And by veneer, I mean cheap wallpaper in many cases.
We like to think we are rational creatures. In truth, we are raging bundles of irrational contradictions and habits ingrained from infancy battling it out beneath a veneer of rationality. And by veneer, I mean cheap wallpaper in many cases.
-
axordil
- Pleasantly Twisted
- Posts: 8999
- Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 7:35 pm
- Location: Black Creek Bottoms
- Contact:
We can talk about rationality. We can discuss what rationality is. We can explain why our actions are rational. But acting rationally...whenever I hear someone go one about being the captain of their soul etc, I tell them if we are captains, we are at the wheels of tiny boats with small sails skimming the surface of a deep, turbid sea. The currents that move us are more powerful than we want to admit, driven by forces we refuse to acknowledge.
Given that, we still manage to make port as often as not, but mostly because the port got built where the current wants to take use anyway.
Given that, we still manage to make port as often as not, but mostly because the port got built where the current wants to take use anyway.
Interesing question. Why would you think they were?Is Mormonism, or Scientology, preferable to Atheism? And to whom?
"What do you fear, lady?" Aragorn asked.
"A cage," Éowyn said. "To stay behind bars, until use and old age accept them, and all chance of doing great deeds is gone beyond recall or desire.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
"A cage," Éowyn said. "To stay behind bars, until use and old age accept them, and all chance of doing great deeds is gone beyond recall or desire.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
This is the classic internet question:
In a fight, who would win, Mormonism or Scientology?
(With a sideshow of atheists taking on whoever appears to emerge as the winner, but as everyone knows, those never have clear winners anyway, so what we are really left with are....atheist spectators.)
And my attempt at a semi-straight-faced answer is that the terrain makes all the difference. In the courts, Scientology; and in Utah, Mormonism.
In American politics, they both lose, of course. You're allowed to be Protestant, Jewish or Catholic and be (for instance) put on the Supreme Court. President...we like to stick to Protestant. Both Mormonism and Scientology would be viewed as too far out there by many Americans (though obviously not everyone cares. At all.)
In a fight, who would win, Mormonism or Scientology?
(With a sideshow of atheists taking on whoever appears to emerge as the winner, but as everyone knows, those never have clear winners anyway, so what we are really left with are....atheist spectators.)
And my attempt at a semi-straight-faced answer is that the terrain makes all the difference. In the courts, Scientology; and in Utah, Mormonism.
In American politics, they both lose, of course. You're allowed to be Protestant, Jewish or Catholic and be (for instance) put on the Supreme Court. President...we like to stick to Protestant. Both Mormonism and Scientology would be viewed as too far out there by many Americans (though obviously not everyone cares. At all.)
First of all, aside from both being founded in America, there isn't much comparison between the two.
As an answer to your first question: Important people come from a many different walks of life. The choice or tradition (born into it) of religion may play little in the development of that person as "important" in some way to a nation or society. I think too much importance is placed on the religion one practices as a measure of anything, unless that religion professes beliefs that are illegal.
As an answer to your second question: the choice or tradition of a religion professed is not a measure of integrity. Integrity is determined by the actions of the individual, and there have been horrible people belonging to all creeds. Religion often provides a framework for what could be considered an ideal way of life (in accordance to that religion's perception/context) but it is still the responsibility of the individual to adhere to that framework, and many fall short.
As an answer to your first question: Important people come from a many different walks of life. The choice or tradition (born into it) of religion may play little in the development of that person as "important" in some way to a nation or society. I think too much importance is placed on the religion one practices as a measure of anything, unless that religion professes beliefs that are illegal.
As an answer to your second question: the choice or tradition of a religion professed is not a measure of integrity. Integrity is determined by the actions of the individual, and there have been horrible people belonging to all creeds. Religion often provides a framework for what could be considered an ideal way of life (in accordance to that religion's perception/context) but it is still the responsibility of the individual to adhere to that framework, and many fall short.
"Ut Prosim"
"There are some things that it is better to begin than refuse, even though the end may be dark" Aragorn
"Those who commit honorable acts need no forgiveness"
http://killology.com/sheep_dog.htm
"There are some things that it is better to begin than refuse, even though the end may be dark" Aragorn
"Those who commit honorable acts need no forgiveness"
http://killology.com/sheep_dog.htm