uh, i used to take religion *very* seriously.
but then, if i went to hang out with religious friends, people thought i was a religious nerd.
later i found it to be much harder and more demanding psychologically than i could handle, and gave it up for health reasons, before i actually stopped believing in it.
Alan Watts suggested that some, if not all religious paths are dangerous, and can lead to insanity, if one does not have proper guidance. within that statement, he included Zen Buddhism, which he was very fond of.
i think this is true. religion is far more dangerous than most people realize, can be habit-forming, and requires skillful guides to lead the interested student. But often, it seems to me, that many religious leaders are mere amateurs, and many Protestant leaders are just dopes with bibles. i pick on Protestants because i was raised as one, and therefore it would not be proper for me to pick on other religions, because, as everyone knows, religion often follows racial guidelines. and for me to question some other religion is nearly as bad as saying something bad about their race.
From my perspective, Protestantism lacks qualified leaders by the very nature of its origins as a replacement for Catholicism, if it may be said to be such, throwing the burden of comprehending the will of God on the individual student, rather than leaving it, by and large, in the hands of clerics, as in the Catholic Church.
i have known Catholics who, feeling detached and powerless in their parish, switched over to Protestantism, and appreciated the feeling of a fuller participation in the mystery.
But oh, as a worrying Protestant (read masturbating), how i longed for a more Catholic shift of responsibility!
yes, i would have switched to Catholicism (and had been in attendance) had i not been too late. but by that time, it slowly dawned on me that i just didn't believe any of it anymore, and felt that i was wrong to set foot where no belief existed in my breast.
Losing or changing one's belief is not illegal.
however, it is extremely difficult and terribly painful. at least, it was for me.
some say you have to believe something, or else you are a fool. but that is just their version of the truth, and now i am not even so sure about that anymore.
why do i need a structured mythology to explain (falsely) how the earth was formed?
ok, let's say for the sake of argument, that myths are not intended as the truth, but are rather, like tall tales that serve some other purpose. in which case, it would be like adding a GUI on top of a very incomprehensible system. perhaps to civilize us and get a handle on ourselves. that, i guess, i can accept. especially if some in the society don't quite understand why they should not covet their neighbor's wife's booty.
but come on! we're really talking about people who did not get socialized properly, or who were not raised properly, because good parenting implies that people *will* learn to respect human life, etc., etc.
Well let's see, both your parents worked, and you got babysat by some minimum wage person who really didn't give a rat's ass about you, and then you were dumped into a school system for what, at least 12 years? which raised you, in effect, (along with the TV) and raised your consciousness to the level of something resembling humanity.
ok, so suppose we *do* need a civilizing type of institution to teach us how to behave properly in the absence of our parents' guidance? and suppose that's what religion was intended to do: why does it have to be Lies?
are lies really needed to civilize us, the wounded masses?
And, and...are we so dense that we don't recognize lies when we hear them?
-Ell
