1461
America's nonreligious are a growing, diverse phenomenon. They really don't like organized religion (apnews.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/news@lemmy.world
420 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Mike Dulak grew up Catholic in Southern California, but by his teen years, he began skipping Mass and driving straight to the shore to play guitar, watch the waves and enjoy the beauty of the morning. “And it felt more spiritual than any time I set foot in a church,” he recalled.

Nothing has changed that view in the ensuing decades.

“Most religions are there to control people and get money from them,” said Dulak, now 76, of Rocheport, Missouri. He also cited sex abuse scandals in Catholic and Southern Baptist churches. “I can’t buy into that,” he said.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 5 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Although all religions are useless and shouldn't have any privilege, only to be practiced in their own spaces, I am aware that not all religions compete in a proselytistic way. I understand that, for example, Judaism doesn't proselytise and that "converting" to Judaism is even a long and difficult process, which makes me think it is like discouraging conversion, in some way, by making it so uphill.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    Pretty sure you can be born into judaism, though. Chances are, it is even the default scenario with even semi-religious parents.

    That's not "keeping to yourself" to me. That's like passing the cigarettes to your kids.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Yeah, I agree, to a certain point. Most Jewish people I know, though, aren't religious at all but for following certain traditions that don't even include eating kosher food. Of course that doesn't include orthodox Jews, but I don't know any.

    As for the training of it ("That's not "keeping to yourself" to me. That's like passing the cigarettes to your kids" and the "default scenario"), well, it's the default upbringing in every family. Besides exceptions, conservative parents will raise conservative kids because that's their growing environment, the same with more liberal ones, etc. That's not proselytising, it's a while different thing

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    That’s not proselytising, it’s a while different thing

    I don't see your point. How is brainwashing children ok when wololo-ing people is not? Even from an egocentric perspective, you have to live in a society.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

    I never said brainwashing children was ok as far as I can recall. Would you mind pointing at the part where I said so it or even implied so?

    What I said is that that isn't proselytising. It's a different concept to raise your kids in a certain way and to go to others who already have a different faith (or none) and try to convince them to convert.

    Of course, I know that everyone is born without any religion and by that account the limit is blurred, yet to raise a kid into one's own faith and/or traditions is not the same as proselytising.

    As for Judaism, I stand by what I said: it's not proselytist in the way other religions are, trying to convert other people. I don't judge it as bad or as good, I don't care. I just state a fact as I've seen/read.

    Edit: word

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I never said brainwashing children was ok as far as I can recall.

    Fair enough, you didn't. I apologize. I lost track of the chain of posters and mixed you up with the first poster who didn't seem to recognize the dangers of passing belief to children.

    As for Judaism, I stand by what I said: it’s not proselytist in the way other religions are, trying to convert other people. I don’t judge it as bad or as good, I don’t care. I just state a fact as I’ve seen/read.

    That may be case. Which is possibly why, historically speaking, Judaism doesn't seem to be on the winning side. Which is bad, because it means opportunities for more fanatical, agressive religions.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Apologies accepted, of course.

    That may be case. Which is possibly why, historically speaking, Judaism doesn't seem to be on the winning side. Which is bad, because it means opportunities for more fanatical, agressive religions.

    On one hand, I agree. Yet I think that had Judaism been more proselytist, it would have gained more followers and, probably, been more fanatical and aggressive. I mean, ultraorthodix Jews are as fanatical as your fellow Taliban or the right-wing Christians.

    Thanks for this exchange of opinions.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Yet I think that had Judaism been more proselytist, it would have gained more followers and, probably, been more fanatical and aggressive.

    Yes, that's what I'm counting on, since I assume that ideas like religions take part in a long-term process of evolution. Unfortunately, the most whackiest, edgiest religions seem to be the most fit. Therefore my answer to the top level post.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •