Do you really think you are helping anyone?

[9-10ths_Penguin]

No, the problem is absolutely NOT solved because some people do not feel it is necessary to respect or tolerate ANY religious expressions at any secular activities

No, that's not it.

Individual religious expressions are fine. Officially sanctioned religious expressions are not.

while some religious people simply do not live in a secular mindset or separate "secular" life from life in general.

Sure they do. At least, they can when it suits their wants. They can certainly separate government affairs from religious affairs when it's them that the government or other religions impose upon.

 

[waitasec]

No, the problem is absolutely NOT solved because some people do not feel it is necessary to respect or tolerate ANY religious expressions at any secular activities - while some religious people simply do not live in a secular mindset or separate "secular" life from life in general.

That's not true. It has been said repeatedly that people expressing themselves religiously... even in public, is quite fine and unobjectionable.

The problem comes when you want to start leading assemblies in prayer when those in attendance aren't all inclined to do so. And that saying those who don't want to pray should "just think about something else" is unacceptable. There's no need to single out yourselves... or to single out others... at a time when everyone gathered is there for a united purpose (be it a graduation ceremony, session of government, etc...)

No, that's not it.

Individual religious expressions are fine. Officially sanctioned religious expressions are not.


Sure they do. At least, they can when it suits their wants. They can certainly separate government affairs from religious affairs when it's them that the government or other religions impose upon.

what they said...

some people do not feel it is necessary to respect or tolerate ANY religious expressions at any secular activities

you sound like the those who get their feelings hurt when their prophet is depicted unfavorably in a cartoon...

tolerate...? oh please

what is intolerable is the audacity to subject people...to set aside their time for your selfish endeavors

 

[Vile Atheist]

Right. It IS unusual - as it probably would be in most of the United States considering that Muslims are a religious minority in this country.

My point was clearly that though it is unusual, it was treated respectfully and tolerantly - as acts by various religious people should be as long as they do no harm to others.

But why would you expect any different? An event being opened by a Muslim prayer here is unheard of, but if it did happen, I don't think anyone would start throwing rotten tomatoes at the imam. I wouldn't be surprised that everyone tolerated it as you seem to be. I'd be surprised if they didn't!

I don't think anyone has a problem with personal religious expression (or at least, if they do, they shouldn't). Your prayer or anyone else's is none of my business. If we were at an event and you folded your hands and prayed to yourself, I wouldn't be offended and I wouldn't care. I'd probably try and give you some more space and try not to disturb you.

But budgeting other people's time for your religious expression isn't exactly right either. I'm still unsure why prayer and personal reflection, if you feel compelled to do it, cannot be done by yourself.

 

[LayzeeDragon]

As long as we believe, there will always be a need to defend against and a wanting to spread that belief since there is always an uncertainty when other people see differently than we do. The belief has taken on a form within us, and overtime we had mistaken it with our false identity and therefore feel defensive and aggressive when it is challenged. If we can let it die, we rest in absolute truth, there is no longer a need to take offense or defense. Truth stands alone. It will always be unaffected so therefore no need to be protected. Now this is not the truth of the Christian or of the Muslim or the Hindu etc. If it is truth within only one religion, it is not real. But It will be considered "special" Individualistic. Truth must be universal. Just as gravity affects everyone on this earth regardless of their creed. There is no drama when people talk about gravity since everyone agrees with it(if they don't, they probably had fallen off cliffs and no longer exist by now). If someone were to preach to you that gravity has a levitating effect. You would simply smile and go about your day without any disturbance in your peace of heart and mind. It must be the same with every other truth especially Absolute Truth such as God. Belief is a fear barrier, and truth is the spear that destroys that fear. Personally, i was raised Catholic, questioned myself why we get to go to heaven while everyone else is going to hell? Inquire the qualities of god and taken faith. Broke away from the rules by reading other religious books. Saw underneath the beliefs that there are truth that exist there also and at first hated Catholicism for keeping me in the dark, but ultimately had a greater respect and love for Jesus, and even more so than ever once the beliefs behind it are destroyed. Since how can you love someone truly if you believe they would banish you into hell? lol. So beliefs get in the way of actual truths And don't be mistaken, all of this wasn't easy, it was a very emotional process. So to keep things short, It all depends on the openness of the individual and their willingness to accept truth. This is where maturity comes in play and not intellectual debate.

*In a way you can say i self - preach myself XD. But if you do hear truth within someone ' s preaching it probably will be indirectly. Since it is said you can't help a person who doesn't help him/her self.

 

[Kathryn]

That's not true. It has been said repeatedly that people expressing themselves religiously... even in public, is quite fine and unobjectionable.

The problem comes when you want to start leading assemblies in prayer when those in attendance aren't all inclined to do so. And that saying those who don't want to pray should "just think about something else" is unacceptable. There's no need to single out yourselves... or to single out others... at a time when everyone gathered is there for a united purpose (be it a graduation ceremony, session of government, etc...)

What I said is ABSOLUTELY true. Even here on this thread we have intolerance for even a moment of silence at a public event.

So no, it's not simply public prayer that's the problem.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

What I said is ABSOLUTELY true. Even here on this thread we have intolerance for even a moment of silence at a public event.

So no, it's not simply public prayer that's the problem.

My opposition to a moment of silence comes out of my opposition to public prayer. It's the same issue in both cases; the difference is a matter of degree.

Even if you don't entirely agree with me on public prayer, you do see my objection when it comes to someone saying "let's all bow our heads and pray together" at a public event, right? Why wouldn't you expect me to have a similar issue with it when the same effect is created, only with a wink and a nod instead of with explicit speech?

 

[Draka]

My opposition to a moment of silence comes out of my opposition to public prayer. It's the same issue in both cases; the difference is a matter of degree.

Even if you don't entirely agree with me on public prayer, you do see my objection when it comes to someone saying "let's all bow our heads and pray together" at a public event, right? Why wouldn't you expect me to have a similar issue with it when the same effect is created, only with a wink and a nod instead of with explicit speech?

Aren't you projecting your assumptions on the supposed speaker though, as to what they mean? If you're at an event like a graduation or what-have-you, and the speaker pauses and says "let's take a moment of silence here" or "a moment of reflection", aren't you assuming that they want you to pray? Perhaps they are a Buddhist and like the idea of a little meditation time to focus. Maybe they are an atheist and want a little time to reflect on their son. Maybe, just maybe, it is me and I'm just trying to provide a little time for everyone to do what they feel they want to do to personally honor this occasion. It's not a "prayer hole" unless you feel it is, because you certainly cannot read the mind of the person who happens to call for it unless they do specifically say "let's bow our heads and pray". Other than that...it's just a little personal time afforded to individuals participating in a group event. I still think you just seem to want to be offended.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Aren't you projecting your assumptions on the supposed speaker though, as to what they mean?

No - I'm looking at the history of these "moments of silence". They emerged, at least in North America, as a response to court challenges on public prayer. The individual motivations of the speaker are pretty much irrelevant.

If you're at an event like a graduation or what-have-you, and the speaker pauses and says "let's take a moment of silence here" or "a moment of reflection", aren't you assuming that they want you to pray? Perhaps they are a Buddhist and like the idea of a little meditation time to focus. Maybe they are an atheist and want a little time to reflect on their son. Maybe, just maybe, it is me and I'm just trying to provide a little time for everyone to do what they feel they want to do to personally honor this occasion. It's not a "prayer hole" unless you feel it is, because you certainly cannot read the mind of the person who happens to call for it unless they do specifically say "let's bow our heads and pray". Other than that...it's just a little personal time afforded to individuals participating in a group event. I still think you just seem to want to be offended.

As long as I can remember, "moments of silence" at public events were only used for one specific purpose: commemorating the dead. Our culture has no other tradition regarding moments of silence.

At events like graduations, moments of silence did not emerge as a response to some perceived need for reflection. They emerged as a response to church-state separation issues. They aren't there because people wanted to reflect; they're there because people wanted a group prayer, but this was ruled illegal, so they went for the closest thing to a group prayer they could get away with.

Even if you use the "prayer hole" for something other than prayer, this doesn't change the history and the original motivation for why it's there.

 

[lilmama1991]

When you evangelize and preach your religion to other people?

Do you really think that other people want to hear you chastise their beliefs and tell them they believe wrong and that they should believe what you believe? Do you have any idea how rude and narcissistic you come off to others when you preach at them and quote scripture at them? Do you honestly think that tactic really helps anyone?

This isn't directed at anyone in particular here, but I know there are some here who like to "spread the word" as it were and really wonder if they think they are helping at all?

Preaching to people and chastising people are two different things.I dont know how other religions do it but jehovah witnessess shows proof while we're the right religion either its from the king james or the holy bible and have facts to back it up but we dont try to make anyone believe us. everybody follow the religion they want to for different reasons and that's their choice.

 

[Draka]

Preaching to people and chastising people are two different things.I dont know how other religions do it but jehovah witnessess shows proof while we're the right religion either its from the king james or the holy bible and have facts to back it up but we dont try to make anyone believe us. everybody follow the religion they want to for different reasons and that's their choice.

Not quite. If you are preaching to others that yours is the only right religion then you are automatically telling them they are wrong. Also, if your goal is not to have others believe you then why proselytize at all? Even right here in this post of yours you try to slip in that that your religion is THE "right" religion because you have supposed proof from a mythology book at the same time you are saying "but we don't try to make anyone believe us". If you're not trying to get anyone to believe you then why go up to people and knock on their doors trying to act like you can prove how right you are to them? Do you not see how approaching people and point blank telling them how right you are, and thus how wrong they are, is not rude or narcissistic?

 

[McBell]

Preaching to people and chastising people are two different things.

It can be.
The problem is that far to many people do more preaching than chastising.

 

[averageJOE]

Preaching to people and chastising people are two different things.I dont know how other religions do it but jehovah witnessess shows proof while we're the right religion either its from the king james or the holy bible and have facts to back it up but we dont try to make anyone believe us. everybody follow the religion they want to for different reasons and that's their choice.

I want to watch you duke it out with this guy: http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/general-religious-debates/117299-right-religion.html

 

[waitasec]

Preaching to people and chastising people are two different things.I dont know how other religions do it but jehovah witnessess shows proof while we're the right religion either its from the king james or the holy bible and have facts to back it up but we dont try to make anyone believe us. everybody follow the religion they want to for different reasons and that's their choice.

disclaimers are not facts, sorry.