Then that's it. It is not FOR you. That doesn't mean it is bad, wrong, poorly organized, or spineless - it just is not FOR you.
Nah, I was just trying to be polite. It's not for me because of all of those reasons. It's lame, horrifically inconsistent, suppressive of logic and reason, poorly organized and spineless. It's not like I just "make up" what I don't like. It's based on observation and reason.
There is a fine line here. I admire someone who studies different belief systems (secular and non-secular) and develops a philosophy that they truly believe in and is intellectually honest. I have no respect for a person who is unwilling to make a reasoned choice, and is therefore noncommittal about every aspect of their spiritual life. At the Church I went to, I found the latter.
I was just pointing out that if there was a congregation with people comprised of the former category, I still don't know if I'd hang out with them at this stage of my life. I'd respect them, and I would not criticize them, though.
I do notice that your attitude about "wrong" is disturbingly Unitarian/Universalist. Newsflash. Some things are "wrong" no matter how people "feel" about it.
You know, I've always thought that UU was just Christianity Lite (All the God, half the hate!), but after reading this thread, maybe I'll check it out. There's one in my town.
Then that's it. It is not FOR you. That doesn't mean it is bad, wrong, poorly organized, or spineless - it just is not FOR you.
Nah, I was just trying to be polite. It's not for me because of all of those reasons. It's lame, horrifically inconsistent, suppressive of logic and reason, poorly organized and spineless. It's not like I just "make up" what I don't like. It's based on observation and reason.
Many of your condemnations of UU are based on your own OPINION and on one Church. Obviously, your experience and observation is different than many. Your accusation of "spinelessness" is based wholly on your subjective view. I am not saying you are not entitled to your opinion, but to state it as a universal fact rather than an opinion or an impression based on little information is not rational - the very thing you are claiming to be.
I do notice that your attitude about "wrong" is disturbingly Unitarian/Universalist. Newsflash. Some things are "wrong" no matter how people "feel" about it.
Look, I am an atheist. But to say that the UU is any more or less wrong than any other faith based organization is just poppycock. I find it to be less offensive for the very reasons you claim it to be more offensive - because they do not claim to have all the answers, nor even a surety in any one specific incarnation of a higher being. My choice of the word "wrong" was not the best, I meant it in reference to you coloring it so negatively, especially when compared to other religions that insert their ideas into religious areas (like government and education).
Look, I am an atheist. But to say that the UU is any more or less wrong than any other faith based organization is just poppycock.
All faith based organizations are wrong. It's just that UU is schizophrenically wrong. So in that regard the volume of what they are wrong about is greater than the typical church.
Sorry, but tolerance only goes so far. If someone believes in something that is not supported by evidence, I am under no obligation to be tolerant of that belief.
Look, I am an atheist. But to say that the UU is any more or less wrong than any other faith based organization is just poppycock.
All faith based organizations are wrong. It's just that UU is schizophrenically wrong. So in that regard the volume of what they are wrong about is greater than the typical church.
Sorry, but tolerance only goes so far. If someone believes in something that is not supported by evidence, I am under no obligation to be tolerant of that belief.
The entire point of tolerance is tolerating ideas that you do not agree with. Tolerance can go quite far, you just choose not to follow it that far. Also, I see the UU as a great step forward for the religious community. It shows that those that cling to religion and the community that they provide are pulling away from their dogmatic tendencies. This is a poor analogy, but it is like nicotine gum for smokers, this is weening them away from the harder, more dangerous drug.
The entire point of tolerance is tolerating ideas that you do not agree with.
Absolutely untrue. I can be tolerant of the person, but I am under no obligation to be tolerant of ideas that have been soundly disproven.
In other words, be kind to the person but don't entertain their wacky ideas. If someone insists that the moon is made of cheese, I'm not going to be tolerant towards their argument at all. I will, however, be polite to them as a person.
This is a poor analogy, but it is like nicotine gum for smokers, this is weening them away from the harder, more dangerous drug.
This is a good thing. What was so frustrating for me is that it seemed like so many people were content to be stuck in this limbo.
Absolutely untrue. I can be tolerant of theperson, but I am under no obligation to be tolerant of ideas that have been soundly disproven.
In other words, be kind to the person but don't entertain their wacky ideas. If someone insists that the moon is made of cheese, I'm not going to be tolerant towards their argument at all. I will, however, be polite to them as a person.
Comments
There is a fine line here. I admire someone who studies different belief systems (secular and non-secular) and develops a philosophy that they truly believe in and is intellectually honest. I have no respect for a person who is unwilling to make a reasoned choice, and is therefore noncommittal about every aspect of their spiritual life. At the Church I went to, I found the latter.
I was just pointing out that if there was a congregation with people comprised of the former category, I still don't know if I'd hang out with them at this stage of my life. I'd respect them, and I would not criticize them, though.
I do notice that your attitude about "wrong" is disturbingly Unitarian/Universalist. Newsflash. Some things are "wrong" no matter how people "feel" about it.
Sorry, but tolerance only goes so far. If someone believes in something that is not supported by evidence, I am under no obligation to be tolerant of that belief.
In other words, be kind to the person but don't entertain their wacky ideas. If someone insists that the moon is made of cheese, I'm not going to be tolerant towards their argument at all. I will, however, be polite to them as a person. This is a good thing. What was so frustrating for me is that it seemed like so many people were content to be stuck in this limbo.