Why I am OK with the "Faith Forum"

[Undercurrent]

I've been an atheist for 47, or so, years (since I was about 13 years old), so I obviously grew up in a country where religion permeates the culture, and have felt the sting of ridicule many times, in many ways. Rather than feel like the outcast that many have tried to portray me, I've become more of an observer.

I agree with those who say that religious dogma has been used to divide, and hurt people. It has been used as a tool, and a shield to do some very ugly things. Hatreds have been inflamed, prejudices reinforced, violence committed, and wars justified in the minds of some.

But religion has also been a force for good. As one who has been involved in the Civil Rights movement starting in my early teens, I saw that force for good come from the pulpits of the black churches, and delivered by men like Martin Luther King Jr. Men, and women of the cloth, and collar marched against oppression, for human rights and against the VietNam, and other wars.

Obama is a Christian, and from all I have come to understand about him, his faith is a guiding, and grounding principle in his life. I believe his faith is a force for good.

I also feel that the Forum might help to put to rest the Muslim lie. Not for the brain dead, but for those few undecideds to whom it might make a bit of a difference. It shouldn't matter one iota what religion a candidate is, but it does.

I personally don't see this as a religious test, or anti Constitutional issue. By the way, my 88 year old dad, who is very anti religious, doesn't like it one bit, but even he says if it will help Obama win he is willing to put up with it.

[babylonsister]

1. I'm not religious and I'm fine with it. Now. I'm curious to see how

it will be handled question-wise. And it's not just about religion, but also about leadership. Should be interesting.

[Occam Bandage]

2. Why I'm okay with the faith forum:

Why the fuck not? No skin off my ass if anyone wants to talk about their personal beliefs.

[TexasObserver]

3. I think religion is silly, at best, and tragic, at worst.

But I see no point in trying to wrest from most of America their devotion to stories and beliefs that exist only their heads, because they have imagined it into existence.

Myths that make up the Roman or Greek gods are easy to laugh at as silly, but take them from the Bible, and suddenly they're real.

[Egnever]

4. Why wouldnt you be?

[skepticscott]

5. The question is

why is faith considered a virtue? Why is saying that someone is "a man of deep and abiding faith" a compliment? Why is believing things in the absence of any evidence, or even in the face of overwhelming contradictory evidence, a quality we want in our leaders?

[jenmito]

8. I feel the same way...

I consider NOT believing in something a strength and compliment. I have no need to "lean" on some imaginary thing to give me strength. I get my morality from myself. I don't behave the way I do for fear of going to hell or for hope of going to heaven. I just take responsibility for my actions and believe in myself.

I find it a weakness to have to resort to some imaginary thing to give you "hope." And when people are killed, religious people say they're with "god" now, in a better place, etc. And when people AREN'T killed, they say "god" was watching over them. Religion is used to justify ANYTHING, from wars to racism. :shrug:

With all that said, I don't BLAME people who are good "in the name of god." As long as they don't force anything on me, whatever gets them through the day...

[Prophet 451]

15. Depends what one holds faith in

Despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, I remain a firm believer in the eventual perfectability of mankind.

As it happens, I'm a man of faith (Luciferian Satanist but still faith). The teachings are the important bit. If it could somehow be proven that my chosen deity never existed, then the faith becomes a philosophy but the teachings remain the same.

[skepticscott]

17. Perhaps it's just a semantic difference

but I would call that hope or optimism, rather than faith in the sense that it's being used here. If the teachings of a religion are solidly based in reason, rather than being adhered to just "because god says so", then it really does qualify more as a philosophy. And it's not that believing in things without evidence is, by itself, such a horrible vice (though I maintain that it is no virtue). It's what people do as a result of that faith that is such a detriment to society. When you substitute gut feelings and blind acceptance of doctrine for reason and evidence as the foundation and justification for public action and public policy, very little good can come from it.

[Prophet 451]

19. That much, I'd agree with

There's a big difference between the teachings being adhered to because they make sense and their being adhered to out of blind obediance. Buddhism, my own faith and a few others contain, within their teachings, words to the effect of "Don't take my word for it, think it through for yourself". Luciferian Satanism doesn't have holy books in the normal sense but we do have influential works (the difference is that holy books are inviolate and can't be argued with, influential works are simply another opinion in the debate) and one of the most important lines in The Devil's Apocrypha (a novel but one based in Luciferian philosophy) is that "if the lot of man is to improve, the seer must be the doer". In other words, don't just bemoan poverty or injustice, don't just pray, get up off your knees and do something about it.

Incidently, I would say the difference between faith and philosophy is the presence or absence of a personified deity.

[AnnieBW]

6. Expect Obama to get hammered on abortion

That's all those crazy Fundies care about. Why weren't they out protesting when McSame voted against SCHIP?

[skepticscott]

9. I'm actually more interested

in where he positions himself on the issues of gay rights and gay marriage. He has not taken a strongly progressive position on those issues in trying to court the black evangelical vote, and he may tack a bit more to the right in this environment, unfortunately. On abortion, I don't think he can afford that, and he and the Fundies will just have to agree to disagree.

[jenmito]

11. I don't think he'll move to the right on gay rights. He says gay people should have the right

to have civil unions with ALL the rights of marriage, but he believes the WORD "marriage" should be reserved for a man and a woman. That's what he ALWAYS said. I disagree with it, but it's how he always framed it.

[skepticscott]

13. It's not just about marriage, though

it's also important how he stands on the issue of bigotry and discrimination against gays in all areas of life. He failed to come out strongly against anti-gay bigotry in the black evangelical community when it would have been very easy to do so.

[jenmito]

10. Why? All he has to say (and DOES say) is he's personally against it but feels women

should be trusted to make the choice best for THEM-after praying about it or talking to people, etc.

[katandmoon]

7. I don't see it helping Obama at all. The MSM will tear his answers apart and

Pick out anything in them they can possibly use against him (regardless of how much of a stretch it is) and dragged through the mud until they resemble nothing Obama ever actually said, while McCain's answers will be embroidered in gold and silver on fluffy heart-shaped pillows.

Of COURSE this is a religious test.

[jenmito]

12. I disagree. The MSM is used to seeing him talk about his religion. If anything,

they'll praise MCCAIN for "showing a part of himself he never talks about" or something.

[pnwmom]

14. I think the fact that this guy says he intends to ask Obama and McCain

the SAME hard questions can only be good for Obama.

Also, I'm tired of conservatives representing themselves as the "real" Christians. IMO, liberals are much closer to the teachings of Christ.

[Blue_Roses]

22. I agree

:thumbsup:

[eridani]

16. I'm fine with it as long as they also do a science forum n/t

[malik flavors]

18. will this be televised?

[rasputin1952]

21. I think C-Span annd MSNBC will carry it...

I know I heard something about it being carried...:hi:

[windoe]

20. To me 'faith' is a way of opening yourself

to another source of inspiration/creativity/wisdom apart from ego self. It MATTERS NOT what this 'other' source of information actually is, it could be another neural pathway to an underused portion of the brain, it could energetically tap into the collective unconscious or higher self, or it could be that we are tapping into beings that are not in physical form. People who open themselves to a set of ideals larger than themselves have an awareness and intention to serve the greater good, and this is needed for a civilization to thrive.

As long as the intent is for the greater good, it is not harmful, IMH.

[bread_and_roses]

23. Just another symptom of our descent into totalitarian theorcratic oligarchy

and the continuing Banana-Republicanization of the US. Fitting and just, I suppose, since we supported the same in SA, which is now rising against its' Oligarchic tyrannies.

[QC]

24. And a way for fundamentalist homophobe Warren to rebrand himself as a 'moderate.'

That's what gripes my ass most about this. It's all about making Warren more powerful.