Not signed in (Sign In)
    • CommentAuthordirtymc11
    • CommentTimeFeb 5th 2009
     (4952.1)
    I think it would be interesting to see what has become of religion in the 'angels' world. When things get bad man has always turned to religion (for better or worse).
    Especially interesting would be to see how some of the more desperate members of the 'angels' enclave view the 'angels themselves. I am sure there have to be some who have an almost messianic view of them.
    I can see cults that view them as the 2nd coming of Christ. Come to sit in judgement of the world and then to establish a thousand year reign.
    Even more interesting would be something like the cults in Ape and Essence (by Aldous Huxley). HE had the people worshipping Satan not because they viewed him as good but because they understood the apocalypse to have been the victory of Satan over God.
    Remember that it has been the norm for most of religious history to view the supernatural and especially Gods as things to be feared and placated so that they do not inflict further suffering.
    Maybe something like this has occurred in WhiteChapel.
    Interesting to think about?
  1.  (4952.2)
    I'd say anyone who would approach the FreakAngels in this regard would be quickly eviscerated by KK, I'd imagine...
    • CommentAuthordirtymc11
    • CommentTimeFeb 5th 2009
     (4952.3)
    yes but in religious matters one does not often approach the object of veneration. Mere humans do not touch the sacred. Just because the object of veneration doesnt want to be venerated doesnt stop people from doing so.
    Do you think Jesus would have appreciated the attention being taken away from his father?
    • CommentAuthordirtymc11
    • CommentTimeFeb 5th 2009
     (4952.4)
    and evisceration could be viewed as being judged unworthy by GOd
  2.  (4952.5)
    Britain's largely a post-religious society, regardless of what a few newspapers would have you believe. To the point where Tony Blair, when running for election, was instructed to NOT talk about his love for Jesus, because it'd cost him votes.
    •  
      CommentAuthorJay Kay
    • CommentTimeFeb 5th 2009
     (4952.6)
    I could see it going either way--some people could see the death and devistation and believe there is no God, or they could think that they survived from the devistation for a reason and that there is a God.

    I'm not sure if the FA's are considered dieties yet, but if their powers are revealed, I'm sure some will believe they are.
    •  
      CommentAuthorWillow Bl00
    • CommentTimeFeb 5th 2009 edited
     (4952.7)
    I can't wait for America to get to where Britain's at in terms of religion. It's so neat to look at sociological trends, and how we go along the same general trends as the countries that initially sent people here, but about 200 to 150 years later. We're still up on tech and such, but not mentality.
    • CommentAuthordirtymc11
    • CommentTimeFeb 5th 2009
     (4952.8)
    Not talking about religion is one thing but I would be interested to see how many athiest serve in Parlaiment? One can remain silent about ones religion but how often does seeking public office require one to act as if they have one.? A society uncomfortable with discussions about religion in the public arena is not necessarily irreligious. Just uncomfortable discussing it. Also remaining silent on ones religion was probably more to not alienate voters of different religions. Removing OVERT religious speech from the public arenas does not mean that religious ideas are not influencing the decisions made.
    America is a society where religion is not supposed to be a factor. However noone has ever gotten elected to federal office of any kind if they have stated that they are atheist. It is easier for a Muslim (my home state just sent the 1st to washington), or (gasp and horror) a gay man to be elected than someone who claims to not be religious. For some reason somehow people got the idea in their head that one NEEDS God to be A good person.
    They forget the saying "it is easy to get an evil man to do good things but in order to get a good man to do evil things you must have religion."
    I am an atheist myself but I find the idea of religion to be endlessly fascinating (especially how it gets morphed on the ground.)
  3.  (4952.9)
    @dirtymc11:

    Speaking as a theist, albeit a Unitarian, I get very nervous when my secular leaders start chatting about Jesus. Mainly because their conception of Christianity is rooted in the Thrid Great Awkening, which if you think the fundies of today are crazy, woo boy. Temperance Leagues...yikes.
  4.  (4952.10)
    If society goes to shit, people will split off into tribes, forget technology, worship animals or nature or something, and then revolve into monotheism. Civilization 4 taught me this so it must be true.
    •  
      CommentAuthornigredo
    • CommentTimeFeb 5th 2009
     (4952.11)
    @ dirtymc11

    Remember that it has been the norm for most of religious history to view the supernatural and especially Gods as things to be feared and placated so that they do not inflict further suffering.


    Not to nitpick but that's not true unless you refer to specific pagan religious traditions before orthodox christianity and even then it's a levelling assumption.
    •  
      CommentAuthorFoley
    • CommentTimeFeb 5th 2009 edited
     (4952.12)
    When civilization comes to ruin and we're back to the days of sweat and toil without the innovation of electricity, religion is the absolute worst thing that could happen to the world.

    History teaches us that. If it wasn't a few organized religions making coppers off of gullible salvation-seekers, then it would be smaller denominations with less scruples. Either that, or outright cults. The last thing people would need on top of food searches, weapon hording, salvaging, and the constant struggle of procuring clean water are Jim Jones and David Koresh wannabes popping up left and right.

    Watch "The Mist". People will believe anything when the chips are down, and governments (or leaders in general, really) aren't around to hold their hand through life anymore.
  5.  (4952.13)
    @Foley

    Religion was and, for more than a few in today's society, is the government. Scarier still, it's hard for me to believe that the rules of most religions are followed for any other reason than fear of eternal damnation, not moral nor ethical reasons. Otherwise there wouldn't be such an emphasis on "Hell" in most religious texts, eh?

    The only problem with the "Mist" analogy is the story is fiction, so it only illustrates the point of view of one storywriter.
  6.  (4952.14)
    To be quarrelsome, what about the monastaries of the dark ages? Think of a sort of "Canticle for Liebowitz" approach. Pre-1800's some of the greatest scientific and mathematical learning was coming out of the Muslim traditions of scholarship, themselves passing down a line of learning from the greeks. A religious community might have many ideas that are disagreeable, but as an instituion they've often been means of transmitting knowledge as well, especially pre-industrial.

    Mind you, modern fundamentalism takes an even more askance view of science than the monks dotting the european countryside, but I could see certain religious traditions playing a community-organizing role in a drowned world.

    God, I could see the Jesuits all but rejoicing at the "oppurtunity" this would afford them.
  7.  (4952.15)
    @Orwellseyes

    A religious community might have many ideas that are disagreeable, but as an institution they've often been means of transmitting knowledge as well, especially pre-industrial.

    Yes, I wonder what happened to that practice? Maybe too much in the way of contradicting facts stepping into the picture?
  8.  (4952.16)
    It's worth noting that I had 20+ years of Catholic education and every biology teacher I had taught us evolution without a whiff of creationism. Again, Jesuits.

    Step back from the ongoing back and forth about religion's place, or lack of one, in society and see it as a means to an end. Say you wanted to pass down information generationally, vital information like "Why is the world this way?" or "Don't go in the radioactive areas" why not use religion as a medium of communication. The "Damned lands must not be entered" or "the great fires, the air burst, wiped the earth clean" might survive longer than any book or organized system of learning. Turning facts into stories as a means of conveyance. Look at modern efforts to examine stories and events from the bible or Qur'an or Torah. People want to know the origins of the stories, the facts behind the legend. Maybe 2000 years after a drowned world scenario future humans would use their legends to suss out the truth.
  9.  (4952.17)
    I think it's important to remember that complete atheism (I use that to refer to a general lack of religion, not in the strictest sense of meaning, i.e. belief that there is no god) is a relatively new world trend; most cultures throughout human history have been supported by a strong backbone of a religion, whether it be the organized mysticism of Tibet, the largely familial-run system of japan, the shamanistic animism in many pre-modern and American Indian cultures, etc. etc.

    @Val A Lindsay II

    As a means of transmitting culture and knowledge, they were largely replaced by governments in modern countries. But in many developing parts of the world, religion remains the primary means of education. Take for instance the religious missionary schools set up in many third world countries, or monasteries in the Himalayan regions where state-sponsored education is virtually non-existant.


    The reason religions operated as a vehicle for education is because of their inherent organization. For instance, the education offered in Europe during the dark ages; while yes, there was a Feudal system of government in place, it offered in terms of infrastructure or organization in matters outside of taxes and the military. Religion, on the other hand, was highly organized allowing for easy transmission of learning. Further, to keep their own complex traditions alive, religious people had to be well educated. Once you've finished memorizing the bible and "holy" works, you have a lot of free time as a monk to play around with other things when there's little scribe work to be done.


    This academic rant has been brought to you from a very tired Graduate student :P
    • CommentAuthorKradlum
    • CommentTimeFeb 6th 2009
     (4952.18)
    Not talking about religion is one thing but I would be interested to see how many athiest serve in Parlaiment? One can remain silent about ones religion but how often does seeking public office require one to act as if they have one.?


    No, we don't just not talk about religion, most of us don't actually care about religion. As far as I can see, a lot of people who pay lip service to religion in this country just do it to get their kids into a particular school.
    •  
      CommentAuthorGekko
    • CommentTimeFeb 6th 2009
     (4952.19)
    There is something I still don't understand, that's the utter belligerancy of believers facing non-believers: they can unite without a blink, they can instantly stop seeing other monotheisms as evil, whenever it comes to claim their being offended when a few atheists dare say the feel okay to not believe there's a god. Atheism is the enemy that generates hysterical attitude.
    Look at those bus campaigns. Look at that driver who felt so offended with the atheist ad he didn't want to drive his bus. Look at those people who raise money to put counter-campaigns AND offer a bible. Offended they claim they are. Insulting they become.

    The don't care about what atheists feel, as if their believing there's no god was based on nothing as if non-believers had no reason to be respected then, not even heard.

    Why can't they accept atheism is not about shoving in their throat there is no god. Atheism is another manifestation of diversity which nevertheless needs to become a bit more radical.
    • CommentAuthorRenThing
    • CommentTimeFeb 6th 2009
     (4952.20)
    @orwellseyes

    It's worth noting that I had 20+ years of Catholic education and every biology teacher I had taught us evolution without a whiff of creationism. Again, Jesuits

    My wife put it like this when she was talking to her friend about her daughter's education: "Catholic schools generally educate first. Christian schools generally indoctrinate first."

    Having been in both, I agree with the statement.