04-21-2008, 02:16 PM | #11 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,084
|
Quote:
|
|
04-21-2008, 08:16 PM | #12 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,589
|
Quote:
Anyway... I've been thinking a lot about secularism lately since listening to an NPR program a couple of weeks ago. To me, it seems attractive on the surface, but one you start delving into specifics, it becomes troublesome. Rather than referring to a specific religion for a moral basis, it instead seems to appeal to some sort of commonly-accepted set of values--what you term "civic virtue". To me, this just seems like a different religion, without all the specific dogma that one can attack and criticize. Sort of convenient. To the extent that a religion's practices violate our core set of innately-held values (which seem remarkably constant across many generations and continents), they should be eliminated from our society. I guess I don't see this as secularism checking religion; I see it as religion is checking religion. |
|
04-21-2008, 08:38 PM | #13 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 860
|
Quote:
|
|
04-21-2008, 08:56 PM | #14 | |
Formerly known as MudPhudCoug
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Land of desolation
Posts: 2,548
|
Quote:
The difference between Mormonism and these religions, from a practical perspective, is that the Mormon product is more predictable and standardized. We indoctrinate uniformly, while others indoctrinate with great variability. I don't believe any church on earth is more centralized than the mainstream Mormon Church. Even Catholicism comes in more flavors than Mormonism does. I'm not saying that centralization and generating a "standard product" is good or bad. The system has its strengths and weaknesses. |
|
Bookmarks |
|
|