Religion & Politics--What's the Diff?

[ThePainefulTruth]

Global warming is an example of political, demagogic propaganda, with the left clinging to the herd mentality--except on religion where the right can be found covering their ears and mooing. Nowhere is this better exemplified than when the "Climate Change" vs. Evolution forces clash in our education systems. I think there's a gene in 95% of humanity that compels them to associate themselves with some sort of blind faith, which fact religion and politics (the mirror image of religion) have been exploiting for 10,000 years. But the one side can only see it in the other side, which makes each side feel more secure.

Or maybe it's 100%, with 5% fighting continually to override their genes. Fight the good fight. Become part of the 5%. Vive la Raisonaires!

 

[Riverwolf]

Well, if that sort of thing were the be-all, end-all of religion or politics, then yes, there'd be little to no significant difference between either of them. As it stands, both are significantly more complicated than what you're describing.

While I disagree heavily with your conclusion, your observation that led to it is accurate: people tend to gravitate towards others of like-mind, where they all tend to agree with each other with little to no questioning. That's natural human social behavior; like the other great apes, we're a tribal species. Most non-indigenous Americans have long lost whatever their tribal connections were, and so we seek out other "tribes" to identify with, whether political or religious in nature, or even fandoms.

I don't know to what degree the term "tribalism" can apply to this behavior, since the term has a few different references, but it's the most self-descriptive term I can think of for this kind of behavior. Perhaps without realizing it, you're also exhibiting this behavior right now, by calling for others to be part of this "5% Tribe", and making that sound appealing by using popular phrases like "fight the good fight".

Thing is, this isn't inherently a bad thing. It's not at all a case of 100% blind, unquestioning tribal loyalty vs 100% cowboy individualism. As always thus far, the only thing in this world that I've seen which is truly binary, is binary itself. I honestly feel like pure cowboy individualism is just as destructive and scary as pure unquestioning group-think.

Side note, climate change isn't so much a political matter as a scientific one. It just happens to be a politically unpopular observation (and one that I observe myself). Be careful of what you label propaganda: applying that term at widespread opinions that you disagree with can indicate the same dismissive political agenda that you're criticizing. While there certainly is a lot of propaganda among certain ecology activists, that doesn't automatically make climate change itself an unreality. After all, there's plenty of pro-college propaganda out there; does that mean college itself is inherently bad and should be avoided?

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

Well, if that sort of thing were the be-all, end-all of religion or politics, then yes, there'd be little to no significant difference between either of them. As it stands, both are significantly more complicated than what you're describing.

Well of course it is, that's the point. Everything is reduced to soundbite/bumper sticker mentality. People don't think, they emote....and get played for it.

I don't know to what degree the term "tribalism" can apply to this behavior, since the term has a few different references, but it's the most self-descriptive term I can think of for this kind of behavior. Perhaps without realizing it, you're also exhibiting this behavior right now, by calling for others to be part of this "5% Tribe", and making that sound appealing by using popular phrases like "fight the good fight".

Yeah, but I'm not demagoging them, it's an appeal to reason, that is, for everybody to use it. And if it's a tribe, so what. Being a thinking member of a tribe or a pack is a whole lot better than being a member of a herd just following the *** in front of you.

Thing is, this isn't inherently a bad thing. It's not at all a case of 100% blind, unquestioning tribal loyalty vs 100% cowboy individualism.

Far too many follow blindly, unthinkingly; and the few 100% cowboy individuals there are, are off living as hermits in a cave somewhere.

I honestly feel like pure cowboy individualism is just as destructive and scary as pure unquestioning group-think.

The former only put themselves at risk. The latter concentrate power into the hands of a dangerous few who do the thinking for them.

Side note, climate change isn't so much a political matter as a scientific one.

That would be true if so scientists weren't selling their souls for government grants and tenure. But people are so vacant, they don't even stir when events like climategate, or Al Gore's self-serving, hypocritical propaganda, are exposed to the light of day. I want everyone to have to buy carbon credits from my bank.

None so blind.....and don't forget, the blindness exists in both politics AND religion. Blind faith is blind faith.

 

[Quintessence]

It is often claimed that people don't think. I have yet to see this substantiated in any meaningful or convincing way, thus this "people don't think" seems to simply be a story that those people like telling themselves for some reason. It seems to me that those who say "people don't think" are usually saying "people don't think the way I would like them to, and they should all agree with me and think the way I do."

 

[Riverwolf]

Well of course it is, that's the point. Everything is reduced to soundbite/bumper sticker mentality. People don't think, they emote....and get played for it.

Yeah, but I'm not demagoging them, it's an appeal to reason, that is, for everybody to use it. And if it's a tribe, so what. Being a thinking member of a tribe or a pack is a whole lot better than being a member of a herd just following the *** in front of you.

Far too many follow blindly, unthinkingly; and the few 100% cowboy individuals there are, are off living as hermits in a cave somewhere.

The former only put themselves at risk. The latter concentrate power into the hands of a dangerous few who do the thinking for them.

That would be true if so scientists weren't selling their souls for government grants and tenure. But people are so vacant, they don't even stir when events like climategate, or Al Gore's self-serving, hypocritical propaganda, are exposed to the light of day. I want everyone to have to buy carbon credits from my bank.

None so blind.....and don't forget, the blindness exists in both politics AND religion. Blind faith is blind faith.

I've not heard hide nor hair from Gore in years. I can observe disastrous climate change right here in my hometown. Also remember: the US government effectively ignores climate change, except with some token measures. I simply don't observe what you're describing.

It doesn't matter that you're not "demagoging"; neither are most people whom you're criticizing. How much have you questioned and critically examined your own political beliefs? Where are your sources of information? Blindly following one's own convictions isn't much better than blindly following others'.

 

[Riverwolf]

It is often claimed that people don't think. I have yet to see this substantiated in any meaningful or convincing way, thus this "people don't think" seems to simply be a story that those people like telling themselves for some reason. It seems to me that those who say "people don't think" are usually saying "people don't think the way I would like them to, and they should all agree with me and think the way I do."

Yeah, that's been my observation, as well. It's a pretty easy trap to fall into: thinking that because the majority haven't reached the same conclusion as oneself, that most other people aren't intelligent/aren't thinking. I used to do that, myself, all the time. Perhaps I still do, to an extent, though I try not to.

 

[metis]

Global warming is an example of political, demagogic propaganda, with the left clinging to the herd mentality--except on religion where the right can be found covering their ears and mooing.

That's complete nonsense as what is known is the result of actual temperature measurements collected universally for over 200 years now. How many times do some people have to be told this before they understand that these figures are not estimates. Instead, the "political, demagogic propaganda" is mostly coming from those who trust Fox and Limbaugh more than the experts in the climate science area.

As has oft been said, "You can have your own opinions but not your own facts".

 

[Father Heathen]

"Climate Change" vs. Evolution forces clash in our education systems.

Uhh, isn't the clash usually between denial of evolution and of climate change vs. scientific literacy?

 

[arthra]

Global warming is an example of political, demagogic propaganda,

/

I think I'd have to part company with you there "Painful"... Where I live in California I've seen the drought first hand and it's affected how we use water already.. I've invested in water saving technologies around my home and the city is giving me a rebate for it...so it's not just propaganda.

As to religion and politics... for me anyway my Faith teaches us to be non-partisan. I do not belong to any political party or endorse any partisan candidates. We encourage people to vote their choices on election day and be good citizens but no body tells us how to vote.

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

It is often claimed that people don't think. I have yet to see this substantiated in any meaningful or convincing way, thus this "people don't think" seems to simply be a story that those people like telling themselves for some reason.

You need look no further than socialism and revealed religion. Constructs supported only by appeals to naked emotions (blind faith) via propaganda, demagoguery and hearsay. If not, if people actually thought about them, they'd both be long gone. It's the my side right or wrong herd mentality. The worst of it is, in other parts of their lives, they cling to reality by their fingernails.

It seems to me that those who say "people don't think" are usually saying "people don't think the way I would like them to, and they should all agree with me and think the way I do."

That's not nearly as much of a blanket policy for me as you make it out to be, but yeah, when focused on those two things, absolutely. What should Darwin have done, tell the Holy Rollers they might be right? Was Scopes wrong? Were Hitler and Marx right? Pandering to PC avoidance of offense at the cost of objective Truth is much worse than the Truth they're trying so hard to avoid--for selfish reasons, almost always power.

Copernicus finally convinced the Church that the Earth orbited around the Sun. But less than a hundred years ago, the scientific consensus (which was upheld by the same tactics that global warming is today), was that the Solar System was part of the Milky Way Galaxy, which was the universe--a universe that wasn't expanding.

What we need to study and learn first and more than anything else is the nature of Truth. But all it draws now is accusations of self-righteous arrogance.

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

Uhh, isn't the clash usually between denial of evolution and of climate change vs. scientific literacy?

That's what you're told, but "climate change" (which was changed from global warming for reasons that are obvious to people with their eyes open), is one of the scientific re-education causes from the left, while the religious right demands that Creationism with the Earth being 6000 years old is championed by the right. Man caused climate change is nothing but computer models with variables being plugged in to churn out the results they want. All their dire predictions over the last 40-50 years just has not come to pass, while they ignore the Sun. They can't scare the Sun.

/

I think I'd have to part company with you there "Painful"... Where I live in California I've seen the drought first hand and it's affected how we use water already.. I've invested in water saving technologies around my home and the city is giving me a rebate for it...so it's not just propaganda.

What does a drought have to do with global warming? BTW, did you know that we're still in an Ice Age that's been going on for 2.5 million years. And the last peak in glaciation occurred 20,000 years ago, with sea level rising 400' since then. We're just now beginning to find evidence of human habitation, even major structures, that were inundated by that rise--no doubt giving rise to the flood myths of Atlantis, and Noah and in other cultures around the world. Yet man is causing global warming with no noticeable change in sea level. And the temperature is unchanged over the last 15 years.

As to religion and politics... for me anyway my Faith teaches us to be non-partisan. I do not belong to any political party or endorse any partisan candidates. We encourage people to vote their choices on election day and be good citizens but no body tells us how to vote.

Your religion doesn't advocate any political positions? Not that it shouldn't. I just think religion and politics should both be founded on reason, not unseasoned faith. I believe reasoned faith is as vital as that faith motivating reason--two halves of the whole.

 

[Altfish]

I just think religion and politics should both be founded on reason, not unseasoned faith. I believe reasoned faith is as vital as that faith motivating reason--two halves of the whole.

Religion based on reason - I'd like to see that, because religion would be gone within a year; religion by definition is based on faith.
Politics, yeah it should be based on reason, but with big business buying politicians to peddle their point of view - not much chance of that happening.

 

[Iti oj]

Global warming is an example of political, demagogic propaganda, !

No your science denial is heard mentality

 

[Prana Pastime]

Global warming is an example of political, demagogic propaganda, with the left clinging to the herd mentality--except on religion where the right can be found covering their ears and mooing. Nowhere is this better exemplified than when the "Climate Change" vs. Evolution forces clash in our education systems. I think there's a gene in 95% of humanity that compels them to associate themselves with some sort of blind faith, which fact religion and politics (the mirror image of religion) have been exploiting for 10,000 years. But the one side can only see it in the other side, which makes each side feel more secure.

Or maybe it's 100%, with 5% fighting continually to override their genes. Fight the good fight. Become part of the 5%. Vive la Raisonaires!

The difference between religion and politics is the whys behind their being practiced and also the what fors behind their being practiced. Faith can be held
by the individual for fulfillment in a psychological sense. One can practice politics for fulfillment psychologically too but that's normally more in a worldly sense. I
think the biggest difference is in the focus. Religion or faith is normally paying attention to a next place or future circumstance while politics is concerned with the
here and now or certain states in the world. I feel like a person having belief in a good way is one not expecting any reward only the joy or fun they may create in the
moment. I don't like fatalistic faith, you follow us or your one of them( a demon or whatever). Politics is partly from necessity and once in a while there actually is
a good politician though they don't normally get the mass following. Money should be taken out of politics somehow then issues could be tackled without this as
the primary concern.

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

Religion based on reason - I'd like to see that, because religion would be gone within a year; religion by definition is based on faith.

Well, the church, which people equate with religion, would be gone, yeah. Reason would undermine any religion based entirely on hearsay revelations and supernatural miracles. Any religious philosophy that isn't agnostic on the possibility of God, and doesn't admit that all it's beliefs are based only on hope, would be exposed as well. Of course no religion is going to go willingly down that path of reason and give up its power. We still have a major religion that seeks world domination through war and theocratic upheaval.

Politics, yeah it should be based on reason, but with big business buying politicians to peddle their point of view - not much chance of that happening.

Yes, and politicians selling themselves to big money interests, and to voters to get them in that position in the first place. What percentage of all the players involved have a degree of integrity? Yes, the voters feel powerless, but they put themselves in that position by not demanding integrity. But we can still rectify things if we'll start looking at things reasonably--starting with the primary mandate for government being the rule of law.

No your science denial is heard mentality

Bald declaratives are nothing but an emotional statement, with a complete lack of reasoning, and like political correctness, an attempt at intimidation.

The difference between religion and politics is the whys behind their being practiced and also the what fors behind their being practiced. Faith can be held
by the individual for fulfillment in a psychological sense.

Yes, the aforementioned hope. But that doesn't violate reason. Faith in revelation and hearsay violate reason.

Religion or faith is normally paying attention to a next place or future circumstance

Tell that to the people who've been burned at the stake, or the Jihadists establishing their Sharia theocracies.

while politics is concerned with the here and now or certain states in the world.

The underside of politics is concerned with power/control and money.

I feel like a person having belief in a good way is one not expecting any reward only the joy or fun they may create in the moment.

Not expecting a reward?

I don't like fatalistic faith, you follow us or your one of them( a demon or whatever).

I don't either. But all organized religions use hearsay revelations that say theirs is the true religion of God. Reason is never involved.

Politics is partly from necessity and once in a while there actually is
a good politician though they don't normally get the mass following. Money should be taken out of politics somehow then issues could be tackled without this as the primary concern.

Money and politics are necessarily connected. The problem isn't money anyway, or even power; it's corruption. The root of ALL evil is a moral/legal double standard.

 

[arthra]

What does a drought have to do with global warming? BTW, did you know that we're still in an Ice Age that's been going on for 2.5 million years. And the last peak in glaciation occurred 20,000 years ago, with sea level rising 400' since then. We're just now beginning to find evidence of human habitation, even major structures, that were inundated by that rise--no doubt giving rise to the flood myths of Atlantis, and Noah and in other cultures around the world. Yet man is causing global warming with no noticeable change in sea level. And the temperature is unchanged over the last 15 years.

What planet do you inhabit "Painful".. and why choose a painful moniker?

LONDON: Possible big changes in key global climate system suggest that global temperatures in 2015 and 2016 are set to reach record high levels, according to new research published Monday by the Met Office, Britain’s official weather agency.


The latest research suggests the Earth’s average surface temperature is running at or near record levels so far in 2015 and the trend is not slowing down. Last year’s temperature has already broken the record for the hottest year.

 

[arthra]

Your religion doesn't advocate any political positions? Not that it shouldn't. I just think religion and politics should both be founded on reason, not unseasoned faith. I believe reasoned faith is as vital as that faith motivating reason--two halves of the whole.

We don't advocate any partisan positions..would be more accurate.. Unfortunately partisanship has dethroned reasonableness and stifled our political institutions in the United States...which country to you hail from there "painful"

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

What planet do you inhabit "Painful".. and why choose a painful moniker?

LONDON: Possible big changes in key global climate system suggest that global temperatures in 2015 and 2016 are set to reach record high levels, according to new research published Monday by the Met Office, Britain’s official weather agency.


The latest research suggests the Earth’s average surface temperature is running at or near record levels so far in 2015 and the trend is not slowing down. Last year’s temperature has already broken the record for the hottest year.

OMG, I hadn't seen this one before, from the IPCC. Maybe they're trying to regain their lost cred:

"LONDON". London what?

And my moniker is The Paineful Truth, because so many find the Truth (my God) to be very painful; and the e is in honor of Thomas Paine of The American Crisis and The Age of Reason fame.

We don't advocate any partisan positions..would be more accurate.. Unfortunately partisanship has dethroned reasonableness and stifled our political institutions in the United States...which country to you hail from there "painful"

Arizona is in the US. As an officer in it's military, I swore to protect and defend the Constitution, which has been almost completely dismantled by many of our civilian officials from Lyndon Johnson (the worst president in our history so far, Obama's not through yet) on. For them, the legal oaths they made have held little if any more reason for them to maintain their oaths, than marriage vows among the general population. Think there might be a connection there?

I assume you and the tenets of your church are against murder, slavery and theft. Those are partisan positions since there are even those who don't believe in them or in any basis for morality. Pro-life and pro-choice are partisan positions, since they reduce reasoning about the most complex moral issue we face down to two idiotic labels. And most things that the religions call morality aren't really about inherent moral rights, but subjective individually determined virtues by the hundreds or thousands. Forcing them on others is what results in theocracies and partisan religious strife.

 

[arthra]

I assume you and the tenets of your church are against murder, slavery and theft. Those are partisan positions since there are even those who don't believe in them or in any basis for morality. Pro-life and pro-choice are partisan positions, since they reduce reasoning about the most complex moral issue we face down to two idiotic labels. And most things that the religions call morality aren't really about inherent moral rights, but subjective individually determined virtues by the hundreds or thousands. Forcing them on others is what results in theocracies and partisan religious strife.

Thanks for your post "Painful"...I guess I overlooked that "e".. Should be maybe "Paine full"

I don't belong to a "church" I'm a Baha'i...

Partisanship relates though in my view to political parties in the arena we witness almost daily.. not getting much done as a Congress or Senate...

Good to hear though you're in a neighboring state...

You might want to take another look at the IPCC figures on Carbon Dioxide at

http://www.ipcc-data.org/observ/ddc_co2.html

as well as the US EPA reports on the South West:

The climate of the Southwest is changing. Over the last century, the average annual temperature has increased about 1.5°F. Average annual temperature is projected to rise an additional 2.5-8°F by the end of the century. [2] Warming in the Southwest is projected to be greatest in the summer. [3]
Warming has already contributed to decreases in spring snowpack and Colorado River flows, which are an important source of water for the region. [2] Future warming is projected to produce more severe droughts in the region, with further reductions in water supplies. Future water scarcity will be compounded by the region's rapid population growth, which is the highest in the nation. [2]

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/impacts-adaptation/southwest.html

I think Arizona is still part of the Southwest.

Arizona State University had a panel not long ago discussing the impact of Climate Change on Arizona.. Here's a portion of what was said.

What we’re seeing in that extreme, what we’re seeing in our wild fires–biggest wild fire ever in Arizona and New Mexico both this year. Both of those fires and other fires in our fair states were dwarfed by the fires that occurred in Texas. They’ve been going on for the whole fire season. What we’re seeing in the news now are ones that are close to Austin.
These are all unprecedented and it’s really being driven by elevated temperatures. Then we had the floods and the tornadoes. Then we had the hurricanes. What’s interesting on all of the–you know, the tornadoes are the only ones where it’s difficult, as a climate scientist, to say anything about human causation. We just don’t know enough about tornadoes.

https://schoolofsustainability.asu.edu/media/video/climate-change-in-arizona/

 

[NulliuSINverba]

Global warming is an example of political, demagogic propaganda

And you know this ... how? What sort of scientific evidence can you provide to support your assertion?

And for the sake of clarity: Are you asserting that human activity cannot impact the climate, or that it merely hasn't so far?

with the left clinging to the herd mentality--except on religion where the right can be found covering their ears and mooing.

Climate change can be debated in the context of the evidence. Religion requires no evidence whatsoever. In fact, faith can be characterized as belief in lieu of evidence.

The difference ought to be apparent at once.

Nowhere is this better exemplified than when the "Climate Change" vs. Evolution forces clash in our education systems.

Wait. There's a clash between those who accept evolution as the best current explanation for speciation ... and those who accept the idea that human activity impacts the global climate?

Can you provide a link?

I think there's a gene in 95% of humanity that compels them to associate themselves with some sort of blind faith

Please explain how an assertion like that isn't essentially an example of blind faith. Thanks.

which fact religion and politics (the mirror image of religion) have been exploiting for 10,000 years. But the one side can only see it in the other side, which makes each side feel more secure.

You've failed to demonstrate that politics is the mirror image of religion. Sorry.

Or maybe it's 100%, with 5% fighting continually to override their genes. Fight the good fight. Become part of the 5%. Vive la Raisonaires!

So far, I'm struggling to find 5% meaningful, substantive content in your original post. Perhaps you could clarify and provide some evidence to budge the needle on my Drivel-o-meter® in your favor?