Poll

Are you religious, and if so, which?

I am an atheist.
17 (24.3%)
I am agnostic.
11 (15.7%)
I am a Roman Catholic.
7 (10%)
I am a Protestant Christian (any denomination)
13 (18.6%)
I am Jewish.
0 (0%)
I am Muslim.
1 (1.4%)
I am a Hindu.
0 (0%)
I am a Sikh.
0 (0%)
I am a Buddhist.
1 (1.4%)
I am a pagan.
3 (4.3%)
I am a Satanist.
0 (0%)
I am a loser goth kid who thinks I am a pagan or Satanist, but in actuality am trying to look cool and/or annoy my parents.
0 (0%)
I follow a different religion.
3 (4.3%)
No spurious nonsense, plz.
2 (2.9%)
Something other than all these options. (You'd better explain it if you choose this, too.)
10 (14.3%)
I am a Mormon. (Church of the Latter Day Saints)
1 (1.4%)
Religion is a smile on a dog.
1 (1.4%)

Total Members Voted: 67

Author Topic: Religous makeup of forum - dwellers...  (Read 11504 times)

Offline Kish

  • HEROISM OK
  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 790
    • Oversight mod.
Re: Religous makeup of forum - dwellers...
« Reply #75 on: September 02, 2004, 08:40:20 PM »
This should be in another thread. As it is not about religion anymore.
You're right.
Beauty standing amidst fiery destruction.

Offline neriana

  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 585
  • Gender: Female
    • Darien NPC for BG2
Re: Religous makeup of forum - dwellers...
« Reply #76 on: October 11, 2004, 05:49:40 PM »
The color of infinity inside an empty glass.

Eral

  • Guest
Re: Religous makeup of forum - dwellers...
« Reply #77 on: October 12, 2004, 03:41:07 AM »
I don't know that religion is quite as compulsory here.(Australia) Although we do have our loony far-right groups, who depressingly, seemed to have influenced policy statements during our election. Perhaps religious belief gives oppressed/minority groups a sense of community and support - the opium of the masses and all that- and that's why those people feel so challenged by an absence of such beliefs.

I know I've taught children who come from families where religious belief is listed as non-denominational - is that just code for atheist?- and it doesn't raise a stir. I think the problem is that tolerant people take a "live and let live" approach, and so you only hear from people who are incensed that you differ from them, and who feel the validity of their belief is under threat.(It's using words like "logic" and "rational" that causes the problem.) Nothing has changed for them really, since heretics were burned.
It's the rest of us have moved on.

Man-o-Steel Man

  • Guest
Re: Religous makeup of forum - dwellers...
« Reply #78 on: October 13, 2004, 01:02:34 PM »
What's with all the aethist  ???

What's wrong with GOD?!?!  :'( :'(

Offline neriana

  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 585
  • Gender: Female
    • Darien NPC for BG2
Re: Religous makeup of forum - dwellers...
« Reply #79 on: October 13, 2004, 05:01:36 PM »
What's with all the aethist  ???

What's wrong with GOD?!?!  :'( :'(

Same thing that was "wrong" with Zeus. Of course, if you want to believe in it, that's fine. I won't whine "what's wrong with rationality, waaah". It's your business so long as you don't try to force others to believe what you do.
The color of infinity inside an empty glass.

Offline Reverendratbastard

  • Perfunctory Psychopomp
  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 728
  • Gender: Male
  • "to keep my metaphysics warm" -T.S.Eliot
Re: Religous makeup of forum - dwellers...
« Reply #80 on: October 13, 2004, 08:19:22 PM »
I know I've taught children who come from families where religious belief is listed as non-denominational - is that just code for atheist?-

  not in yanktown it ain't - although what's the surprise there?, since the u.s. has a preponderance of the 'more-christian-than-thou' malaise.
  no, 'nondenominational', at least in the context of christianity, and if it is applied to any other religion(s) i'm presuming a similar interpretation, is basically as close as they get to unitarian and/or universalist.  by eschewing putting a sect title before 'christian', they tend to claim a more 'pure' spiritual ground.  ("we're simply christians!  all the dogma we need is right here in this massive and oft-ambiguous collection of ancient scripture!")
  according to the basic principle of these folks, for example, luther may have had a point, but what is so christ-like about naming our spiritual practices after one mortal man?  or one mortal concept?  so they're the 'fundies', the impossible-to-debate fundamentalists who overlap with the greedheads of the televanglism circuit (now what's THAT industry like Down Under?  most of my family (melbourne, sydney, kybong QLD) is entirely non-churchy, and the corner that is churchy, fundamentalist in fact (they're in wodonga VIC), would never rely on tv for their doctrine (not that they have anything against tv, in fact they have a healthy minimalist attitude towards it)
 
  i haven't even gone back a page yet.  don't make me dredge!  but first - the voice!
the lord of murder shall perish, yadda yadda yadda.