Religion vs. Cultural Practice vs. Lifestyle

[CharmingOwl]

As the leader of a new religious movement, it seems I have actually created more of a lifestyle, folk religion, or cultural practice more than an actual religion in the case people think of. As long as you believe in the basic tenets (ancestor worship, gods, chakras) you're a member as long as you choose to be. Other new religious movements say that religions need priests, clergy, and others but I honestly disagree. Many smaller folk practices do not have organized religion and tend to do fine.

I made it this way because when I was looking into beliefs I always had an identity crisis. "If I do this am I no longer religious? Should I just convert if I don't believe this?" Making something easy really helps even if it's more of a new age philosophy/ lifestyle than an actual religion. What do you guys think about your own practices compared to very cosmopolitan practices like these?

 

[The Hammer]

All three of these can be used to define my own personal "Path". It's Religious and Spiritual in Nature, there is a cultural basis and background to it; and it is a part of the lifestyle I live and/or try to live.

I think that the best and most fulfilling Spiritualities should incorporate all of these things in tandem.

 

[The Hammer]

Also, Welcome to the Forum!

Wilkommen!

¡Bienvenido!

Bienvenue!

Benvenuto!

Välkommen

dobro pozhalovat’!

 

[JustGeorge]

I think the most important aspects of religion are how it affects(hopefully positively) one's lifestyle.

The separation of one's mundane life and one's religion seems to be more of a modern thing. I try to shy away from that; anything can be spiritual and/or meaningful, if one approaches it correctly.

 

[Jimmy]

The greatest answers I have gotten were by thinking of real life and not by reading books. I have been enlightened to lifes mysteries and I am thankful for it. Before enlightment my life was good too though.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

As the leader of a new religious movement, it seems I have actually created more of a lifestyle, folk religion, or cultural practice more than an actual religion in the case people think of. As long as you believe in the basic tenets (ancestor worship, gods, chakras) you're a member as long as you choose to be. Other new religious movements say that religions need priests, clergy, and others but I honestly disagree. Many smaller folk practices do not have organized religion and tend to do fine.

I made it this way because when I was looking into beliefs I always had an identity crisis. "If I do this am I no longer religious? Should I just convert if I don't believe this?" Making something easy really helps even if it's more of a new age philosophy/ lifestyle than an actual religion. What do you guys think about your own practices compared to very cosmopolitan practices like these?

You might take a look at the Quakers (the Society of Friends). They are often seen as Christian, but not all would agree.

Quakers seek religious truth in inner experience, and place great reliance on conscience as the basis of morality. They emphasise direct experience of God rather than ritual and ceremony. They believe that priests and rituals are an unnecessary obstruction between the believer and God.

A Quaker meeting (which is their form of religious serive) consists of little more than silent waiting, with participants contributing as they feel moved.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

As the leader of a new religious movement,

You consider yourself on par with Moses, Muhammad, Jesus?

 

[Balthazzar]

Religion, I'm sure, began from social values which became cultural practices and lifestyles, all of which were based upon truth's that were understood during these periods of social development. Life is always changing, and as life changes we are often forced to change also and adapt. The nature of life, truth, reason, value and meaning, logic and necessity dictate ongoing developmental changes in our cultures as well as individuality as it relates to acceptance. Life may change, but truth is always truth - It is always through truths that paradigms shift, change, and develop. In some religious circles, these acts of change are called acts of repentance. We are required to continually grow in understanding. It's how we develop our social structures and how we navigate life. I think a practical approach to religious doctrine and study is beneficial, as the doctrines pertain to history and present-day realities. Religion = Cultural practices and lifestyles.

 

[Ella S.]

Technically, you cannot found a folk religion. "Folk religion" is a term specifically designed to address religions or parts of religion that emerge or grow within a shared culture, normally over the span of a few centuries at least, and is usually put together from common beliefs arrived at by multiple individuals or communally.

What you have would be categorized more accurately as a New Religious Movement or, as you say, a lifestyle. Or a way of life or a philosophy or a guiding principle.

You also have not created a new cultural practice or a new culture, because you already inhabit and live within a particular society which has not adopted your practices as social norms. You are a part of that society's culture. If your movement grows enough in membership and influence, it might one day become a subculture or even grow to become a culture, but I don't think it has reached that point yet.

 

[CharmingOwl]

Technically, you cannot found a folk religion. "Folk religion" is a term specifically designed to address religions or parts of religion that emerge or grow within a shared culture, normally over the span of a few centuries at least, and is usually put together from common beliefs arrived at by multiple individuals or communally.

What you have would be categorized more accurately as a New Religious Movement or, as you say, a lifestyle. Or a way of life or a philosophy or a guiding principle.

You also have not created a new cultural practice or a new culture, because you already inhabit and live within a particular society which has not adopted your practices as social norms. You are a part of that society's culture. If your movement grows enough in membership and influence, it might one day become a subculture or even grow to become a culture, but I don't think it has reached that point yet.

I guess this is true. I was never really good at accurately describing or labeling complex things.

 

[nPeace]

As the leader of a new religious movement, it seems I have actually created more of a lifestyle, folk religion, or cultural practice more than an actual religion in the case people think of. As long as you believe in the basic tenets (ancestor worship, gods, chakras) you're a member as long as you choose to be. Other new religious movements say that religions need priests, clergy, and others but I honestly disagree. Many smaller folk practices do not have organized religion and tend to do fine.

I made it this way because when I was looking into beliefs I always had an identity crisis. "If I do this am I no longer religious? Should I just convert if I don't believe this?" Making something easy really helps even if it's more of a new age philosophy/ lifestyle than an actual religion. What do you guys think about your own practices compared to very cosmopolitan practices like these?

I am thinking if I borrowed certain practices from the world, and used them in my religion, I am still of the world - a 'worldling'.
It would not matter what I think.
The same would be true, if I borrowed certain practices of religion, and used them in my lifestyle, or mixed them from various sources. It would still make me...
Wouldn't it?

 

[idea]

Considering the age, number, and diversity of humans it would be difficult to find anything new that hasn't been practiced by someone somewhere at some point in history.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I guess this is true. I was never really good at accurately describing or labeling complex things.

Just the quality one would want in, for example, "the leader of a new religious movement."

 

[Ella S.]

I guess this is true. I was never really good at accurately describing or labeling complex things.

Nooo! You do fine.

It's just a technical term in anthropology that's only useful because it has a very narrow meaning, so I don't want it to end up being used too much outside of that context or else it will make communicating complex ideas more difficult.

You express yourself adequately from what I've read. Don't be so hard on yourself.

 

[Angelical]

I was mentioning to someone else somewhere, there are Christian Nationalists and Christian National Socialists. You think, “Wow, great, let’s bring Jesus back to Politics and things”. But that’s also like the People Fire Bombing Synagogues. You see that and it’s like ISIS, you think “That’s not a Religion”. So then there are Christian Socialist Nuns who have Socialist Newspapers and things and are doing like Jesus who would sell Perfume and things and give the Money to the Poor. Then there are Christian Democrats, like the PAN, National Action Party in Mexico. They are kind of like Conservatives in America.

Then there is Modi, a Hindu President who actually like got rid of some People for not being Hindu, but China is next door and things. Turkey has a President for Life at the Head of the State. The Pope lives in a Catholic City and Rules, compassionately, the Holy See.

 

[MikeDwight]

 

[Angelical]

As the leader of a new religious movement, it seems I have actually created more of a lifestyle, folk religion, or cultural practice more than an actual religion in the case people think of. As long as you believe in the basic tenets (ancestor worship, gods, chakras) you're a member as long as you choose to be. Other new religious movements say that religions need priests, clergy, and others but I honestly disagree. Many smaller folk practices do not have organized religion and tend to do fine.

I made it this way because when I was looking into beliefs I always had an identity crisis. "If I do this am I no longer religious? Should I just convert if I don't believe this?" Making something easy really helps even if it's more of a new age philosophy/ lifestyle than an actual religion. What do you guys think about your own practices compared to very cosmopolitan practices like these?

I think you are kind of asking a Question that I have lots of details for.

This was written by me, Aug 2018, see attachment to see the PDF it is referring to

___________

A lot of people seem to think they know how Religious Marijuana Works in Court and are willing to spout off about it, but they do not know what they are talking about, so I want to explain how it works for everyone.

First, most Religious Marijuana Case's failures can be summed up by this 1 DEA Response to the Church of Reality:
http://www.churchofreality.org/dea/dea-respondents-brief.pdf

Here is what they told them
1. They aren't a Religion, because they have no Gods, no Spirit World, no Diet, no Clothing or Jewelry, no Mandatory behavior, no Banishment for violation of behaviors, no Fasting, etc, etc; the case that contains the rules for what "is or is not a Religion" is here: Africa v. Commonwealth, 662 F.2d 1025 (3d Cir. 1981)..
2. They asked for a Medical Exemption, even though they said it was Religious use, they said they were like self-medicating, and if you want some kind of Medical Exemption from a Scheduled Substance, you need a PhD/MD.
3. They said "all plants", so the DEA said "why don't you use all the others then instead".
4. They said it was for Meditation, which means that it is not Central to the Religion, and they are not burdening them by denying it. That has been the rule back since Timothy Leary said he used it for Meditation, and they said that it has to be central to the Religion like the Native Peyote Religion, where without it, there is not a Religion.

That sums up what they said in the Church of Reality response, and also sums up why most Religious Marijuana Cases fail, for example, The International Church of Cannabis has been ruled a "Club" and not a Religion, because no one in the "Religion" actually has to smoke Marijuana, it's not mandatory. The Ethiopian Zion Coptic Church is the best Case to look at. They are a Rastafarian Church that almost got an exemption in the 80s, but the DEA argued that someone could forge a Membership card and the Marijuana could get into illegal Channels and the Court used that reasoning to accept the "If no one can do it, Religion can't do it" argument. But in 2016 the Federal Marijuana Registry Opened up, and the Company Catalent and 25 other Companies this year, are now importing Marijuana for Research, and GreenWhich Pharma is creating a THCv Medicine.

In 2006, Ayahuasca became legal for not only Religious use, but for Importation for Religious use, through Customs. So DMT, a Schedule I Substance, is allowed to be shipped in through Customs for Religious Use. Then the DEA was forced by the Supreme Court to create an Exemption process, so there is an exemption process now. And I am going through the process. Have you heard of Lexi, the little girl who has Seizures and is from Texas? She went to a Federal Court with a Medical Argument, and she almost made it in the case "Washington v. Sessions, et al", except that she "didn't follow the DEAs guidelines" so the Court would not determine the Constitutionality of her argument until she went through their process. I have gone through their Religious Process, and am almost finished with that process, so I have the standing that Lexi lacked in challenging the Controlled Substances Act, the entire Law, plus I have standing for Religious use in Court.

Our Temple believes that Marijuana is the Flesh of the Lord God Shiva, the Hindu Marijuana God. And THCv is a form of Lord Shiva, and is used for fasting. The Federal Court has ruled that the DEA only has the right to ban "Marijuana" as it is defined in the Law, and do not have rights to regulate anything beyond that, see Hemp Industries Association v. DEA, Nos. 03-71366, 03-71693 (2004) where they determined THC naturally found in Marijuana seeds is not THC under the law because it is not "Marijuana" or "Synthetic THC". So the least restrictive means, would be to not ban us from using these Legal, Unregulated, Substances. We also have Gods, we do Divination and Prophecy, we have a Spirit World, and Jewelry, and Hair styles, and everything that are involved in Observing the Religion, so it is a Religion. So, now that we have a Religion, and non-Scheduled Substances involved (I have given the DEA the option to let us grow plants in legal States, or to let us Synthesize the Cannabinoid), this is a Case just like the Scientology E-Meter Case. And Scientology E-Meters are unregulated by the Government as far as their Religious Use, see United States v. ARTICLE OR DEVICE, ETC., 333 F. Supp. 357 (D.D.C. 1971).

So that is how Religion works in the Courts, and there will be Case Law for it soon so you can just copy me.

 

[Orbit]

I think you are kind of asking a Question that I have lots of details for.

This was written by me, Aug 2018, see attachment to see the PDF it is referring to

___________

A lot of people seem to think they know how Religious Marijuana Works in Court and are willing to spout off about it, but they do not know what they are talking about, so I want to explain how it works for everyone.

First, most Religious Marijuana Case's failures can be summed up by this 1 DEA Response to the Church of Reality:
http://www.churchofreality.org/dea/dea-respondents-brief.pdf

Here is what they told them
1. They aren't a Religion, because they have no Gods, no Spirit World, no Diet, no Clothing or Jewelry, no Mandatory behavior, no Banishment for violation of behaviors, no Fasting, etc, etc; the case that contains the rules for what "is or is not a Religion" is here: Africa v. Commonwealth, 662 F.2d 1025 (3d Cir. 1981)..
2. They asked for a Medical Exemption, even though they said it was Religious use, they said they were like self-medicating, and if you want some kind of Medical Exemption from a Scheduled Substance, you need a PhD/MD.
3. They said "all plants", so the DEA said "why don't you use all the others then instead".
4. They said it was for Meditation, which means that it is not Central to the Religion, and they are not burdening them by denying it. That has been the rule back since Timothy Leary said he used it for Meditation, and they said that it has to be central to the Religion like the Native Peyote Religion, where without it, there is not a Religion.

That sums up what they said in the Church of Reality response, and also sums up why most Religious Marijuana Cases fail, for example, The International Church of Cannabis has been ruled a "Club" and not a Religion, because no one in the "Religion" actually has to smoke Marijuana, it's not mandatory. The Ethiopian Zion Coptic Church is the best Case to look at. They are a Rastafarian Church that almost got an exemption in the 80s, but the DEA argued that someone could forge a Membership card and the Marijuana could get into illegal Channels and the Court used that reasoning to accept the "If no one can do it, Religion can't do it" argument. But in 2016 the Federal Marijuana Registry Opened up, and the Company Catalent and 25 other Companies this year, are now importing Marijuana for Research, and GreenWhich Pharma is creating a THCv Medicine.

In 2006, Ayahuasca became legal for not only Religious use, but for Importation for Religious use, through Customs. So DMT, a Schedule I Substance, is allowed to be shipped in through Customs for Religious Use. Then the DEA was forced by the Supreme Court to create an Exemption process, so there is an exemption process now. And I am going through the process. Have you heard of Lexi, the little girl who has Seizures and is from Texas? She went to a Federal Court with a Medical Argument, and she almost made it in the case "Washington v. Sessions, et al", except that she "didn't follow the DEAs guidelines" so the Court would not determine the Constitutionality of her argument until she went through their process. I have gone through their Religious Process, and am almost finished with that process, so I have the standing that Lexi lacked in challenging the Controlled Substances Act, the entire Law, plus I have standing for Religious use in Court.

Our Temple believes that Marijuana is the Flesh of the Lord God Shiva, the Hindu Marijuana God. And THCv is a form of Lord Shiva, and is used for fasting. The Federal Court has ruled that the DEA only has the right to ban "Marijuana" as it is defined in the Law, and do not have rights to regulate anything beyond that, see Hemp Industries Association v. DEA, Nos. 03-71366, 03-71693 (2004) where they determined THC naturally found in Marijuana seeds is not THC under the law because it is not "Marijuana" or "Synthetic THC". So the least restrictive means, would be to not ban us from using these Legal, Unregulated, Substances. We also have Gods, we do Divination and Prophecy, we have a Spirit World, and Jewelry, and Hair styles, and everything that are involved in Observing the Religion, so it is a Religion. So, now that we have a Religion, and non-Scheduled Substances involved (I have given the DEA the option to let us grow plants in legal States, or to let us Synthesize the Cannabinoid), this is a Case just like the Scientology E-Meter Case. And Scientology E-Meters are unregulated by the Government as far as their Religious Use, see United States v. ARTICLE OR DEVICE, ETC., 333 F. Supp. 357 (D.D.C. 1971).

So that is how Religion works in the Courts, and there will be Case Law for it soon so you can just copy me.

You could just move to a legal weed state…

 

[Angelical]

You could just move to a legal weed state…

No, I don’t know if we can do outside links, but:

DEA Religious Exemption Process

I have contacted the DEA to submit a Petition under their RFRA Exemption Process DEA Religious Marijuana Petition - The Shaivite Temple I also have a meeting on November 6th with the Marijuana Enforcement Agency, where I will be showing them the DEA Exemption process, and Gonzales V O Centro...

www.420magazine.com

DEA Administrative Law

This case started with the information in the linked thread but it is now 3 Federal Cases https://www.420magazine.com/community/threads/dea-religious-exemption-process.419059/ So I am creating a thread in the Legal Section also, in order to start some legal Discussion I have been Hindu since I...

www.420magazine.com

Religious Marijuana Is Now Legal On The Federal Level

I have an open Case in Dallas, so I am going to explain everything in this thread and I will post the updates here. This thread explains the Pharmaceutical process DEA Form 225 This thread explains the Religious Law DEA Religious Exemption Process This one explains the Temple The Shaivite...

www.420magazine.com

Texas is where it’s at. My Home State, the Buckle of the Bible Belt.