Susan's Place Transgender Resources

It's really been wearing on me lately, that I really seem alone when it comes to religion. I know there are other people out there, but they don't show themselves. I feel like I'm only in the company of dead people. Well, on some points anyway. I don't think there is anybody whose beliefs are really quite that close to mine (but I hope so). It's just so lonely, and I'm always on the defensive as there as I don't have anyone to help stand my ground. I'm not sure what my point was with all of this. I guess I just wanted to say it.

I can relate to the feeling of being religiously alone.

My own practice is an amalgamation of Christianity, Soto Zen Buddhism, Wicca, Asatru, and a touch of shamanism. I attend a Unitarian Unversalist church primarily because it's the closest thing to a religious community that I really fit with.

Everyone is religiously alone. You can not find two mainstream christians out there that see god the exact same way even.

And history teaches us that agreement on religion doesn't guarantee piece between two parties.

I feel somewhat alone in religion too, Aelita. What's your religion, may we ask?

I highly recommend the Unitarian Universalist Church.  It is a gay/trans affirming community, with a humanist approach that is not religeous.  Many churches fly the rainbow flag, not because a great deal of congregants are gay, but as a matter of principle.  I've been to about a dozen services, and never heard the words Jesus or God.  I believe in God, but have never heard anything in a UU service I could disagree with.  I go to the service for community, and then pray to God on my own.

Quote from: Aelita Lynn on May 15, 2009, 02:29:32 PM
I really seem alone when it comes to religion.

Sorry you feel that way.  I know I do too sometimes.  You may or may not be alone, hard to tell if we don't know where you are coming from.

(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fganjataz.com%2F01smileys%2Fimages%2Fsmileys%2FloopyBlonde-blinking.gif&hash=4545ddf8251cf9c32ae6074d56e48bc34a755857)Kristi

Quote from: Miniar on May 15, 2009, 05:38:46 PM
Everyone is religiously alone.

There are plenty of us that do not have a religion.

Echo another religious trans person who's got a lonesome, unique set of beliefs. I'm sure there's a connection here: trans people are much more like than cis people to question and reject the norm. "Because I said so" isn't motivating for us. The same independent thought we apply to gender we also apply to religion.

---

Post Merge: May 15, 2009, 10:21:48 PM

---

Oh, my beliefs are entirely Christian, but they're a mix between (Eastern) Orthodox and (Western) Protestant. I wrote some of it here: transchristians.org/Home/about/liberal-orthodoxy (http://transchristians.org/Home/about/liberal-orthodoxy)

Religion? Are you talking about the practice of preaching (talking allot) but not really being much of a help to anyone?

Religion isn't about community: it's about belief.

Quote from: Annwyn on May 15, 2009, 10:33:07 PM
Religion isn't about community: it's about belief.

And control.

Quote from: Vexing on May 15, 2009, 10:33:45 PM
And control.

Belief.

Unless you care to cite all the some odd 3 million current religions on the globe and prove that they all are about control.

I'll let Mr. Cline do that for me:
http://atheism.about.com/b/2005/04/11/using-religion-to-control-others.htm (http://atheism.about.com/b/2005/04/11/using-religion-to-control-others.htm)

OK you two...Punishment shall be delt. You both must say "I praise Goddess Virginia and wish her garden well" before and after speaking to anyone about anything. Oh, and send your monetary contributions to my P.O. Box  :laugh: >:-) :laugh:

Quote from: Aelita Lynn on May 15, 2009, 02:29:32 PM
It's really been wearing on me lately, that I really seem alone when it comes to religion. I know there are other people out there, but they don't show themselves. I feel like I'm only in the company of dead people. Well, on some points anyway. I don't think there is anybody whose beliefs are really quite that close to mine (but I hope so). It's just so lonely, and I'm always on the defensive as there as I don't have anyone to help stand my ground. I'm not sure what my point was with all of this. I guess I just wanted to say it.

Would you care to expand on your feelings? In what way are you alone when it comes to religion? Philosophically? Theologically? Socially? You mention that you feel your beliefs are different; are you able (or comfortable) expressing the nature of your beliefs? I am curious, because, well, the first person I discussed my need to be female with was a Christian Faith Healer (I was sincerely curious about the possibility of a miraculous transformation) and was told that my feelings were the result of demonic or satanic influence and that my soul would be damned if I did not deny my feelings and refrain from even contemplating being anything other than what God made me. There are only two ways I can think of for a male to truly be transformed into a female (I don't include science or technology that one day might work, on the grounds that it doesn't exist yet) and that would be a miracle or magic (the existence of which has not been proven one way or the other) which I have to believe in as a consequence of believing in God. I've gotten a lot of weird reactions, even from other transpeople, for stating this belief. I have a lot of experience in having a "unique" perspective when it comes to religion, philosophy and even science. Personally, I get the impression that the purpose of religion is to keep people from asking the really hard questions by requiring them to accept "on faith" answers that are not answers at all.

Being trans, we have the advantage of being forced to learn that we cannot take "who we are" for granted. We all know our lives would be much better if we could be what we appeared to be, but no matter how hard we try to conform to our birth sex, our bodies, we are unable to escape from the fact that our true gender, a key part of our identity, who we are, the proper expression of our souls, is the opposite--or something else entirely! The very fact that this conflict exists, and is so agonizing, ought to be proof enough (however subjective) of the existence of our souls. The belief we all have, that who we are matters more than what we are, is a powerful argument that there is indeed more to us than form and substance we possess in our short lives. Since we all go through a great deal of this alone, in our own minds, it is not surprising that we would tend to see things very differently from people who do take themselves for granted (and I don't mean that in a negative way).

Quote from: Virginia Marie on May 15, 2009, 11:11:30 PM
OK you two...Punishment shall be delt. You both must say "I praise Goddess Virginia and wish her garden well" before and after speaking to anyone about anything. Oh, and send your monetary contributions to my P.O. Box  :laugh: >:-) :laugh:

My loyalty to the FSM forbids me from such blasphemous actions.

Quote from: Vexing on May 16, 2009, 12:18:36 AM
My loyalty to the FSM forbids me from such blasphemous actions.

Your right, the garden does better with happy spirits. You and Annwyn would probably kill the plants and then jump the fence to chase each other about and cat fight 'till you both got hit by a car  :P

Quote from: Vexing on May 15, 2009, 10:47:23 PM
I'll let Mr. Cline do that for me:
http://atheism.about.com/b/2005/04/11/using-religion-to-control-others.htm (http://atheism.about.com/b/2005/04/11/using-religion-to-control-others.htm)

He did not do that.  He wrote nothing more than an inflamed editorial.

I demand citation proving that every single religion on the globe prompts the believer to behave in a way that he/she wouldn't behave originally.

If you can't provide that, and I know you can't, then forfeit your statement and just admit that you can't do it, and therefore cannot back up the claim that all religion is about control, and therefore have no place challenging what is fact with what is proposition.

Quote from: Vexing on May 16, 2009, 12:18:36 AM
My loyalty to the FSM forbids me from such blasphemous actions.

I'm IPU myself.

(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F_M3KcDDpUUfo%2FSGS90aQH2JI%2FAAAAAAAAAJU%2FXl11L8hoBQc%2Fs400%2F180px-Uri.svg.png&hash=e6baf78a801fe0bb586ed07b7d2db7fb24015c2a)

"Invisible Pink Unicorns are beings of great spiritual power. We know this because they are capable of being invisible and pink at the same time. Like all religions, the Faith of the Invisible Pink Unicorns is based upon both logic and faith. We have faith that they are pink; we logically know that they are invisible because we can't see them."

As an aside, my religious philosophy can be summed up as follows: I'm an agnostic, with only a tendency to commit Buddhism. I try to follow the example of Guan Yin, and the four Zen vows of the Bodhisattva.

In my own words:

There's too many sins not to commit some - but I'll try not to anyway.

There's too many people to help them all - but I'll try to help them anyway.

There's too many virtues to attain them all - but I'll try to attain them anyway.

Perfection is impossible - But I'll try to perfect everything anyway.

The core of Christian teaching is "Love God: Be Kind". In my philosophy, by doing the second, the first becomes either irrelevant, or an inescapable consequence.

And while a single person is drowning, how can one leave the pool?

I'm also as spiritual as a brick.

Quote from: Annwyn on May 16, 2009, 01:28:02 AM
If you can't provide that, and I know you can't,

Oh, I can. You know I can.
It's a matter of how much time I'm willing to devote to researching every branch of every whimsical belief in a supernatural entity - and debunking it into a control system.
The "I know you can't" comes from the fact that you know I couldn't be bothered investing that much time in such a worthless project.
But I have the ability.
Just not the will.

Point is moot, really.

When you speak of religion, do you mean spiritually or being well versed in the particular strain of dogma you engage in?

Being spiritual does not require being religious and as such is more ethereal to the common man (or woman, not to be sexist here)...

I have always had a problem with the dogma... and I can almost guarantee you wont find any two people of the same religion who agree on the meaning of the dogma they practice.

Being spiritual also does not require faith... yet another intangible that many cling to for lack of being able to make sense of their existance and/or surroundings...

Maybe the answer is we are all very much alone... hence the reason so many turn to religion in the first place...

Virginia will allow Cindy, Stacy, Jaimey, Shannon, Chris and a few other friends into the garden

Quote from: Vexing on May 16, 2009, 01:42:47 AM
Oh, I can. You know I can.
It's a matter of how much time I'm willing to devote to researching every branch of every whimsical belief in a supernatural entity - and debunking it into a control system.
The "I know you can't" comes from the fact that you know I couldn't be bothered investing that much time in such a worthless project.
But I have the ability.
Just not the will.

Point is moot, really.

The point is not friggin moot.  You made a statement, therefore it is your responsibility to back it up, Burden of Proof being on you.  If you can't provide it that then take it back.

If you can't follow the most basic rules of debate then don't bother opening your yapper.

And posting an article that was referring to Christianity as a reference for all religion, how lame is that?

Exceedingly lame.

I'm disgusted, I figured you could actually talk sensibly for all your strutting but you've left me without even the satisfaction of an intelligent conversation: just a web of disappointment.

If we all stuck to saying only things we could prove, it wouldn't be much of a discussion.

Even if you were right, and I'm not saying you are; it doesn't look good on you.

Quote from: GinaDouglas on May 16, 2009, 02:12:31 AM
If we all stuck to saying only things we could prove, it wouldn't be much of a discussion.

Even if you were right, and I'm not saying you are; it doesn't look good on you.

I am correct.

By definition, religion is the acceptance of a set of beliefs.

Whether those beliefs influence day to day life is not implied.  Therefore to assert that claim in such a disparaging way merits at least a bit of proof whether it be hard or circumstantial.

So Vexing, I'm still waiting for you to back up that statement you made so eloquently or take it back.

Somehow, I doubt that Aelita was looking for such volatile responses. Maybe such is better for PMs  :laugh:

Have to agree Virginia; A & V seem to be on a separate thread; and it's personal. :icon_chainsaw: :icon_2gun:

My feeling, and I don't have any religion, is that you need to discuss your belief(s). There appear to be a myriad of them in this community. I think you would find people who do have similar concepts.
But then again a new religion seems to be created every few minutes. And there is nothing wrong in that.

Cindy

Quote from: Annwyn on May 16, 2009, 01:56:22 AM
The point is not friggin moot.  You made a statement, therefore it is your responsibility to back it up, Burden of Proof being on you.  If you can't provide it that then take it back.

If you can't follow the most basic rules of debate then don't bother opening your yapper.

And posting an article that was referring to Christianity as a reference for all religion, how lame is that?

Exceedingly lame.

I'm disgusted, I figured you could actually talk sensibly for all your strutting but you've left me without even the satisfaction of an intelligent conversation: just a web of disappointment.

If I spend one second on each of the 3 million religions you profess, that's 34 DAYS solid I'd have to spend on proving my point.
That's 816 hours.
Now, if I were to be a good researcher and spend at least an hour researching each religion, that would be 5,208 days.
Which is 14 YEARS.

That's just quaintly idiotic.

---

Post Merge: May 16, 2009, 04:39:22 AM

---

Quote from: Annwyn on May 16, 2009, 02:15:43 AM

So Vexing, I'm still waiting for you to back up that statement you made so eloquently or take it back.

You'll be waiting a long time, given the parameters you outlined.

And finally: she's gone.

Time for happy Annwyn to come out again^_^

I rarely post on this forum because the discussions never interest me. Then, finally a discussion did interest me, but it's devolved into a boring "making fun of theism" / "debate over New Atheism."

In the naive hope of being productive again - how do other trans people in religious minorities cope?

Religious minorities in Iceland don't suffer any significant negative attention. So it doesn't add to my issues.

Quote from: Ephilei on May 16, 2009, 04:33:39 PM
In the naive hope of being productive again - how do other trans people in religious minorities cope?

I found the Unitarians by accident. There's at least 1 MtF at the one I go to. Every Sunday, they start by saying anyone is welcome there. They list various traits that some religious folks find offensive, including the phrase "gender identity." So, I'm lucky; I've got this UU church here in town (an hour's walk, or a 20-minute bike ride) that is very warm and welcoming.

Quote from: Aelita LynnIt's really been wearing on me lately, that I really seem alone when it comes to religion.

The worst thing that can happen to one's belief system is to have those beliefs challenged. Im not talking about others who challenge you... Im talking about the realization that everything you thought, believed and held dear contradicts the very things that you know and are. My first realization of feeling alone was when I saw those who blindy followed ideas and rituals without feeling or passion or thought. I spoke earlier of spirituallity and faith, but that seems to either be lost or held irrelevant by those that profess being religious. Like its some kind of flower child/new age/blah kind of notion.

I can't conceive of the notion of restless spirits or wronged past lives any more than some heavenly form of bookeeping that records if youve kept lent or hallal or kosher or {fill in the blank}. We end up having to pick and choose from column A and B like a chinese menu, and that strikes me as flawed. The very act of questioning these things brings out reactions in people that range from extreme passion to the downright absurd! Even those that choose not to believe themselves become so angry at the "true believers" that they create their own "anti-religion" religion.

Moreover, I cant tell you how many times ive heard the expression on these forums that "god doesnt make mistakes" and the enormous amount of bandwidth chewed up debating back and forth, sometimes denegrading into useless backbiting that does little to help those who seek answers. If one truly believes in omnipotent beings, do we even have the capacity to define "mistake" or argue if this being or beings are capable of such acts? And if these beings are nothing more than some fanciful figment of our psyche, what the hell are we arguing about?

Which brings me back to the original point... when your spiritual/belief/faith/whathaveyou notion doesnt fit into some nice little box the feeling of lonliness can be overwhelming. Because when you get right down to it, every religion becomes a definition of who we are and what role we play, both as individuals and as a group, fit into the big picture. Once we realize we are nothing but a blip in the vast gianormous cosmos, its hard not to feel alone...

Aye, but theres the rub. Its not all bleak or pointless... the butterfly effect. Even on such a massive scale, everyone, no matter how different or insignificant affects everyone and everything else. Even the pure science buffs cant ignore that... quantum physics has more than proven that to be the case...

Yet, in spite of everything I know and believe, I still feel so damned alone... <sigh>

Quote from: Stacy Brahm on May 16, 2009, 05:31:38 PM
Which brings me back to the original point... when your spiritual/belief/faith/whathaveyou notion doesnt fit into some nice little box the feeling of lonliness can be overwhelming. Because when you get right down to it, every religion becomes a definition of who we are and what role we play, both as individuals and as a group, fit into the big picture. Once we realize we are nothing but a blip in the vast gianormous cosmos, its hard not to feel alone...

Well put. It would make me glad to hear such true words if the message weren't so damning.

Besides that, you can define a religion as "a community of people who share common beliefs." When you lose one of those common beliefs, you lose a little kinship with that community. When you lose a belief that's a tenet, you've lost a whole community.

For instance, a tenet of Easter Orthodoxy is that all the teachings of the Church Fathers have complete authority. I believe in the majority of Orthodoxy, but I don't believe that and that prevents me from ever being Orthodox of part of their community. I could stay with them for 50 years, go to every service, form intimate friendships, share infinte laughs and experiences but I'll never be one of them. When I pray with them, "protect the Orthodox Church," I won't be including myself. All because I try my darndest to seek the truth.

Man that sucks.

If I were conformist, I wouldn't be in this mess.

Quote from: avmorgan on May 16, 2009, 12:04:56 AM
There are only two ways I can think of for a male to truly be transformed into a female (I don't include science or technology that one day might work, on the grounds that it doesn't exist yet) and that would be a miracle or magic (the existence of which has not been proven one way or the other) which I have to believe in as a consequence of believing in God.

I though I was the only one!  Oh how I have prayed for a magical transformation, or for aliens to scoop me up and make me a woman.

I believe God had a purpose for making me the way that I am.  I havent figured out what that purpose might be, but I know in my heart, and in my soul it wasnt a mistake.  If I could make it all go away I know that I wouldnt.  As much as it pains me, I like the need to be feminine.  I am glad that God gave me the ability to feel this way.  I would be just another miserable man without it, and thats not something I want to be.

Interestingly, we still have not heard back from Aelita Lynn since she started this thread.  I am still wondering why she feels alone and where she is spiritually. 

QuoteIf I were conformist, I wouldn't be in this mess.

That is why I like being Reformed.  We believe that we always have to be reforming in order to be faithful.

(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fganjataz.com%2F01smileys%2Fimages%2Fsmileys%2FloopyBlonde-blinking.gif&hash=4545ddf8251cf9c32ae6074d56e48bc34a755857)Kristi

As long as you are in the company of those who live the principles of your religion, you are not really alone.  My wife is not the same religion I am (Mormon), but she values the same things I do as we both pursue righteous living and action.

Sorry I haven't said anything in a while, I got sick and really didn't feel like talking. Also, I was a bit put off by the hijack earlier. I'm a bit better now, so I think I'm ready to talk again.

Well, I'm alone because my religious views views are offensive to a lot of people. I'm not a satanist, but if people know my beliefs they are liable to call me that. Oftentimes even people who aren't very religious think my views are stupid. I have to go into a long, drawn-out explanation before they'll change their mind that it's not.

In the aspects that are offensive, there are groups with similar ideas. But if you put everything together, then there is no group that I can fit into. I'm always at odds with parts of any given tradition.

A religion should help, not condemn or oppressed people. But the patrarchal religions (one God, mostly male) are in this way. This is sad.

Quote from: Kristi on May 16, 2009, 09:36:28 PM
That is why I like being Reformed.  We believe that we always have to be reforming in order to be faithful.

Touche.

It's not that I want to be conformist, I just occaisonally day dream over it.

---

Post Merge: May 17, 2009, 08:03:58 PM

---

Quote from: Kristi on May 16, 2009, 09:36:28 PM
That is why I like being Reformed.  We believe that we always have to be reforming in order to be faithful.

Touche.

It's not that I want to be conformist, I just occaisonally day dream over it.

Quote from: Annwyn on May 16, 2009, 01:56:22 AM
If you can't follow the most basic rules of debate then don't bother opening your yapper.

My partner keeps talking about how we should discuss and not debate.

Quote from: Annwyn on May 16, 2009, 02:15:43 AM
I am correct.

By definition, religion is the acceptance of a set of beliefs.

No, actually it's not. "The term 'religion' refers to both the personal practices related to communal faith and to group rituals and communication stemming from shared conviction. 'Religion' is sometimes used interchangeably with 'faith' or 'belief system,' but it is more socially defined than personal convictions, and it entails specific behaviors, respectively." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion)

I went to Catholic schools for 13 years. "Religion" was a class we all studied, whether we were believers or not.

In religion class, I was taught that "religion" is more than just a set of beliefs; it was a way of life. So, it could be argued that religion is a way of life that's based on a set of beliefs. This is the definition I use for myself.

Community comes into play when people of similar beliefs look for or create religious communities. There could be various reasons for this. Some might seek/create community to not be alone. Some, like my wife and daughter, seek/create community for purposes of social justice ministry. And, yes, sadly, there are those who seek/create community for purposes of control. I've been fortunate so far and haven't had much dealings with this third group since leaving the Roman Catholic Church 20+ years ago.

Secularism and Freethinkers created the community we live in the U.S. , that has all the factors such as social justice in our laws without having to believe in a deity. The difference is it is based on facts rather than beliefs.

Yet, how are the Secularists and Freethinkers helping rebuild New Orleans? Behind the lines, saying it's too expensive, that secular dollars can't be spent in this way. My daughter has been part of church groups to help with the rebuilding process.

Secularists argue that altruism and helping those in need is not a good use of time or money. Yet, this is exactly what my wife does as a ministry fellow with San Francisco Night Ministry. People on the streets who have trouble getting help from shelters and programs have nowhere to turn to. It's these ministers who literally walk the streets at night who offer them help.

Secular law in California says that same sex marriage is not acceptable. Yet, there are churches in California that will perform wedding ceremonies for same sex couples even if the state will not recognize them. These religious communities are giving their support where the secular community does not.

Secularists and Freethinkers might have gotten the country started, but they are not the be-all-end-all of social justice.

But, all of this is off-topic.

Quotesocial justice

It is a matter of opinion. New Orleans should not be rebuilt. It has been an ecological disaster from the word go. It should be wetlands which would be much better for the world majority.  Marriage is just religious dogma. People can qualify for those rights in less taxed states.

QuoteThese religious communities are giving their support where the secular community does not.

LOL ask the majority of churches and what church put the money in the defeat of rights.

QuotePeople on the streets who have trouble getting help from shelters

The world is over populated, keeping some people alive only takes food from others.

As usual, I feel like mentioning the simple fact that religious debates often dance close to the edge of arguments. Try and stay respectful the the rights of each other to his or her own religious beliefs and opinions and if you find yourself getting annoyed or talking in circles, just walk away.
On another note, how about we get back on topic. Okay?

Quote from: Shades O'Grey on May 18, 2009, 10:36:58 AM
Yet, how are the Secularists and Freethinkers helping rebuild New Orleans? Behind the lines, saying it's too expensive, that secular dollars can't be spent in this way. My daughter has been part of church groups to help with the rebuilding process.

Secularists argue that altruism and helping those in need is not a good use of time or money. Yet, this is exactly what my wife does as a ministry fellow with San Francisco Night Ministry. People on the streets who have trouble getting help from shelters and programs have nowhere to turn to. It's these ministers who literally walk the streets at night who offer them help.

Secular law in California says that same sex marriage is not acceptable. Yet, there are churches in California that will perform wedding ceremonies for same sex couples even if the state will not recognize them. These religious communities are giving their support where the secular community does not.

Very good points.  Let's just hope nothing bad ever happens to Lisagurl's home town.  I would not like to live in her kind of world.

Quote from: Shades O'Grey on May 18, 2009, 10:36:58 AMSecularists and Freethinkers might have gotten the country started, but they are not the be-all-end-all of social justice.

The very assertion here is one of the most ridiculous, historically inaccurate statements I have ever seen made.  Lisa, I wonder if you believes the Holocaust is a hoax too.

(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fganjataz.com%2F01smileys%2Fimages%2Fsmileys%2FloopyBlonde-blinking.gif&hash=4545ddf8251cf9c32ae6074d56e48bc34a755857)Kristi

Philosophy we should question the belief that life is more important than the quality of life.  We can not keep producing more life without understanding the whole point of it and the whole earth rather than just what pops in front of your eyes.

Yes I lived near New Orleans and there is a lot of public sentiment to remove all commercial development and let it go back to nature. Beauty is not man made development ask the creator.

Social justice is much more than keeping people alive. Freedom is to be free to be successful or fail, live or die as you want. Freedom is not force feeding people that do not want to be free to make it on their own.

Quote from: lisagurl on May 18, 2009, 04:38:08 PM
Beauty is not man made development ask the creator.

2 things..

1. Man Made Art, including architecture, can be extremely beautiful.

2. Not everyone believes in a creator.

QuoteIt is a matter of opinion.

People are taught to admire man made things. Nature does not need any marketing.

People are taught to admire man made things. Nature does not need any marketing.

Interesting point.  Though I'm not all that sure about it.  I mean I've taken people to places of spectacular natural beauty (Lake Tahoe, the Pacific Coast, Yosemite) and it blows them away.  However, the first time some people go to an art exhibit, and really see real art (as opposed to reproduced art) it seems to have a similar effect.

Quote from: lisagurl on May 18, 2009, 07:15:54 PM
Nature does not need any marketing.

And that's why flower-shops never run any advertisements.....

QuoteAnd that's why flower-shops never run any advertisements.....

Most flowers in stores are man made. A creator can be your own mind or even a quantum particle. Do you ever think outside the box?

Things that are domesticated needed human intervention.
Today's world does not even know what is natural anymore.

Quote from: tekla on May 18, 2009, 07:19:12 PM
People are taught to admire man made things. Nature does not need any marketing.

Interesting point.  Though I'm not all that sure about it.  I mean I've taken people to places of spectacular natural beauty (Lake Tahoe, the Pacific Coast, Yosemite) and it blows them away.  However, the first time some people go to an art exhibit, and really see real art (as opposed to reproduced art) it seems to have a similar effect.

And rather interestingly, at least in my recent experience is how passing through a gallery or museum and observing the paintings can color the vision afterwards.

Sunday I spent the day at the Philly Museum of Art with the "Cezanne and Beyond" (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/06/arts/design/06ceza.html) exhibit that's there til May 30 (The show was extended about 2 weeks so disregard the end-date listed in the link.)

In kinda drinking in Cezanne, Mondrian, Emanuel Kelly, Picasso, etc when I exited I walked around the drive from the east exit to the west parking lot I observed rather closely the skyline and cityscape. One is more attuned, or at least I was, to the lines and planes of the city, the intersections of shape and the muting of natural life within the cityscape. Form became easier to contemplate just for it's own sake.

An interesting circumstance that after, for instance, coming out and doing the same walk after seeing the Pennsylvania Impressionists a while ago I didn't recognize. The eye can be tuned, or affected by the experience.

I think the same thing tends to be true with religion, the heart and mind can be affected by the context of the person's religion. Those of us who "worship" in groves see, perhaps, things not as clearly man-made as being paramount, including our belief in religion. A forest, perhaps, having a beauty and power in nature that a "god" cannot ever possess. Oth, a suburban mega-church surrounded by acres of parking lots enclosing a corrugated metal building with a gigantic roof and some sort of plastic-y windows stained in some fashion and all placed beside a major highway or street or interstate perhaps leaves one with a different view of both humanity and the nature we are all encased with.   

Different strokes, indeed. But some prolly more conducive to human-feeling and the recognition that humans are worthy as simply being a part of that nature than are others. Of course, I could be wrong. But give me a grove to dance and worship in any day in any weather over the rituals performed under a roof inside a building. 

Quote from: Kristi on May 18, 2009, 04:23:14 PM

Quote from: Shades O'GreySecularists and Freethinkers might have gotten the country started, but they are not the be-all-end-all of social justice.

The very assertion here is one of the most ridiculous, historically inaccurate statements I have ever seen made.  Lisa, I wonder if you believes the Holocaust is a hoax too.

(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fganjataz.com%2F01smileys%2Fimages%2Fsmileys%2FloopyBlonde-blinking.gif&hash=4545ddf8251cf9c32ae6074d56e48bc34a755857)Kristi

Actually, it depends on what one is talking about. If one is talking about "The United States" then, indeed, the "Founders" were perhaps the only distinct American generation that valued civil government and reason to any great degree and took great pains (seeing the harshness of religious suzerainty as practiced in Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Connecticutt and Virginia) to limit the effects of religion on the conduct of civil government.

Like I said, the only generation. The ongoing erasure of the strict lines between the two came about as the nation grew older and today the idea is that somehow Puritans and Southern Baptists founded the civil goverment. They did not.

Puritans did however found some of the colonies as did other religious who appeared, under the name of "freedom of religion" to mandate the "freedom" to practice their own religion while stringently preventing others from the practice of theirs within the confines of those colonies.

Huge differences.

N~

Quote from: lisagurl on May 19, 2009, 08:10:00 AM
Most flowers in stores are man made. A creator can be your own mind or even a quantum particle. Do you ever think outside the box?

Things that are domesticated needed human intervention.
Today's world does not even know what is natural anymore.

It's poor form to suggest I don't think out of the box simply because I don't agree with you. And I still do not consider there to be any one creator.

The assumption that something man-made is unnatural is a little strange. It requires man to be unnatural.
That is to say, if man is natural, then man's creations are an extension of man's nature, and so man's creations are "natural". If man's creations are unnatural, man is not natural.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, no object, "natural" or man-made is beautiful in an of itself, it's beautiful because "you", a "human being", observes it and deems it beautiful. So without man (or a being of similar sentience) perceiving an object as beautiful, there is no beauty.

Man, as the end result of centuries of natural evolution, is natural. Man as a being able to perceive beauty, attributes beauty to objects. As such, not only are we a part of nature, but all that we create is an extension of our nature. And as such, man made objects can be just as beautiful as objects that have never been touched by human hand, if man deems it so.

I think there is a huge difference between what is natural (common to all) and what is unnatural - or a learned behavior.

It does not surprise me that people feel alone and isolated in most western religions, based as they are on a death cult, and why people like Nichole (and countless generations over the centuries before the death cults came into power) feel a common bond in what is loosely defined today as pagan beliefs, specifically those beliefs that find a common bond in all of nature, a connection beyond ourselves, and in that, celebrate, not death, but birth, not men, but women as the mother goddess.

A whole lot of art needs to be learned.  Nature does not.  I could take people to the Sonoma Coast, and they can frolic in the waves, pick up seashells and all that, but after a while, they settle down and let the sound, the rhythm, the smell, the taste and the entire experience not just overwhelm them, but suck them into it.  That is the true sense of what we would call the sublime - to stand in awe of how big the world is, and how we are still a part of it.  And no one needs to be taught it.  No one needs to be told (or as in Nichole's example of the art and the buildings 'guided' or perhaps, even more properly 'informed') how to feel about it, or how to see it.  It is, and in just being we know what it is.

I always, or at least as an adult, once I put away childish things and all, like fairy tales - came to believe that the basic point of Xian thought was to make people lonely, to cast them out from each other, to isolate them on the point of death, rather than bringing them communion as part of something larger, i.e. the natural world and their part within it.
 

Quote from: tekla on May 19, 2009, 11:21:14 AM
...

It does not surprise me that people feel alone and isolated in most western religions, based as they are on a death cult, and why people like Nichole (and countless generations over the centuries before the death cults came into power) feel a common bond in what is loosely defined today as pagan beliefs, specifically those beliefs that find a common bond in all of nature, a connection beyond ourselves, and in that, celebrate, not death, but birth, not men, but women as the mother goddess.

...

I always, or at least as an adult, once I put away childish things and all, like fairy tales - came to believe that the basic point of Xian thought was to make people lonely, to cast them out from each other, to isolate them on the point of death, rather than bringing them communion as part of something larger, i.e. the natural world and their part within it.
 

I agree with the art points and the natural world points as well, tekla.

But, the "death cult" point I think may be the actual focus of how I perceive xtianity. Death is most certainly a part of the "life process." But it isn't the primary part of it, it's just another part and there is most certainly life-after-death in the very real-ist way possible. A living thing's energy is released and it's body (matter) changes to energy and differently structured bits of matter. If actually placed within the earth or burnt it becomes part of the life-process again. (It does in western burial cultures as well just takes a good deal longer for the return to occur given the slowness of disintegration of caskets and concrete vaults, etc.)

When I was being raised I have to admit that I worried a lot about death and "the hereafter." Over time and by embracing life in all of it's intricacy (or at least those parts I can grok) I believe that I've discovered a much healthier and positive (at least not death-centered) way of being in the world.

The xtian cult took a concept, at least after Jesus and with the domination of Paul early and the bishops after 120 CE or so, and managed to do something that most cultures (won't say all, but certainly not many) had done before. That was to abstract humanity from the rest of life. And we in the West and everyone we successfully proselytize has been cursed with it ever since: nature and life are just dead matter, of little or no value except as resources to be exploited fully and discarded by first xtian and then scientific (colored with xtian) povs.

Life itself and consequently anything human is completely alienated from meaningfully being "tied together." The "Great Chain of Being" and our current & traditional xtian "last days" syndromes have exiled us from the rather un-frightening cyclic existence our cultures have previosuly known.

Personally, I find xtianity to be more definitely implicated in that from Ireneaus, Jerome, Augustine and Aquinas right through Bacon, Descartes, Pascal, Newton through the present day than I do Jewish religion. Muslim povs in that regard appear to me to be xtian derived. I often wonder if that isn't one of the largest reasons why xtians seem prone to dislike Darwin so darned much: he positied a world of change through time, but a basically never-ending process rather than the "three-score and ten years and then gone forever" approach of xtianity.

O, well, whatever. My way works for me. I feel rather intimately tied in to "Life" in all it's forms, from viruses and minerals right through humans and whatever else may be beyond us. To quote one of Alyssa's favorite writer's titles: An eternal golden braid.

N~

I've always liked Lynn Townsend White, Jr, "The Historical Roots of Our Ecologic Crisis", Science, Vol 155 (Number 3767), March 10, 1967, pp 1203–1207.

I personally doubt that disastrous ecologic backlash can be avoided simply by applying to our problems more science and more technology. Our science and technology have grown out of Christian attitudes toward man's relation to nature which are almost universally held not only by Christians and neo-Christians but also by those who fondly regard themselves as post-Christians. Despite Copernicus, all the cosmos rotates around our little globe. Despite Darwin, we are not, in our hearts, part of the natural process. We are superior to nature, contemptuous of it, willing to use it for our slightest whim. The newly elected Governor of California, like myself a churchman but less troubled than I, spoke for the Christian tradition when he said (as is alleged), "when you've seen one redwood tree, you've seen them all." To a Christian a tree can be no more than a physical fact. The whole concept of the sacred grove is alien to Christianity and to the ethos of the West. For nearly two millennia Christian missionaries have been chopping down sacred groves, which are idolatrous because they assume spirit in nature.

The gov he was speaking of, was Ronald Regan.  And the underline is mine, not the good doctor's.

You can read the entire article here, very interesting - if not for its time, revolutionary - stuff.


And you can look it up on your own, its reproduced all over the net.  What'da think I am, your personal researcher?  Besides, I'm guessing White's argument is over the heads of most people, though his language is clear and simple.

Wow, what a wonderful essay!

And I especially liked the conclusion:

QuoteThe greatest spiritual revolutionary in Western history, Saint Francis, proposed what he thought was an alternative Christian view of nature and man's relation to it: he tried to substitute the idea of the equality of all creatures, including man, for the idea of man's limitless rule of creation. He failed. Both our present science and our present technology are so tinctured with orthodox Christian arrogance toward nature that no solution for our ecologic crisis can be expected from them alone. Since the roots of our trouble are so largely religious, the remedy must also be essentially religious, whether we call it that or not. We must rethink and refeel our nature and destiny. The profoundly religious, but heretical, sense of the primitive Franciscans for the spiritual autonomy of all parts of nature may point a direction. I propose Francis as a patron saint for ecologists.

Always did think Francesco was one of the more human and human-realists of xtian practice and thought. He didn't get bogged down in the "death-cult" so much, although those stigmata! :laugh:

It's rather interesting to compare Francesco with Teilhard de Chardin as "before" Baconian scientific hegemony and "after" Baconian scientific hegemony. 

http://www.uvm.edu/~jmoore/envhst/lynnwhite.html (http://www.uvm.edu/~jmoore/envhst/lynnwhite.html)

N~

And I'm sure that Ginsburg just loved this! :laugh:

QuoteWhat we do about ecology depends on our ideas of the man-nature relationship. More science and more technology going to get us out of the present ecologic crisis until we find a religion, or rethink our old one. The beatniks, who are the basic revolutionaries of our time, show a sound instinct in their affinity for Zen Buddhism, which conceives of the man-nature relationship as very nearly the mirror image of the Christian view. Zen, however, is as deeply conditioned by Asian history as Christianity is by the experience of the West, and I am dubious of its viability among us.

Yeah but it really was Gary Snyder who really first saw that.

QuoteI feel rather intimately tied in to "Life" in all it's forms, from viruses and minerals right through humans and whatever else may be beyond us

Thinking outside the box might be more than it sounds. A new book " Out of Our Heads" Why you are not your brain, and biology of consciousness  by Alva Noe.

It is an interesting take on how consciousness of the mind is also outside the physical body.

Quote from: tekla on May 19, 2009, 01:31:29 PM
Yeah but it really was Gary Snyder who really first saw that.

True. Allen was more Mahayanaly inclined. :) But I still bet Allen loved the notion, even if he had to credit Snyder with the idea. :)

Quote from: Mina_Frostfall on May 15, 2009, 02:29:32 PM
It's really been wearing on me lately, that I really seem alone when it comes to religion. I know there are other people out there, but they don't show themselves. I feel like I'm only in the company of dead people. Well, on some points anyway. I don't think there is anybody whose beliefs are really quite that close to mine (but I hope so). It's just so lonely, and I'm always on the defensive as there as I don't have anyone to help stand my ground. I'm not sure what my point was with all of this. I guess I just wanted to say it.

If God is omnipresent he has to be with you and in you and all around you for this statement to be true. everyone feels alone at one time or another, even Jesus on the cross felt like he was alone. " my God, My God why hast thou forsaken me." were the words spoken by Christ, yet three days later the same God that had forsaken Christ raised him from the dead.