I think that all religions have both positive and negative attributes. I'd like to focus on the positive attributes, that is, those tenets that followers of each faith don't just preach, but actually practice, to the betterment of all. So I've made a list of what I think to be the best ideals of differing faiths. Imagine if they could all be brought together.

DISCLAIMER: If your religion is not included, I didn't know enough about it, it's not that I didn't deem it positive... lol Also, if you can think of others that I missed, please add them.

In no discernible order:


Catholicism - importance of education
Judaism - support for the family and community
Quakers - importance of self-reliance
Islam - oneness of faith, completely united
Hinduism - value of adherence to ritual
Baptist - desire to share the message with others
Mormonism - promotion of healthy lifestyle tenets
Methodist - everyone is welcome to be in the group
Buddhist - everything in moderation, the middle path
Rastafarianism - equality for all
Unitarian - all ideas/beliefs are equally considered
Lutheran - necessity of accountability
Anglican - love for country
Wicca - love for nature
Amish - self-sustainability
Humanist - faith in your fellow man

What do you guys think?

Views: 338

Replies to This Discussion

I think it's a noble and valid point made well - religions have promoted strong positive attributes amongst their followers. A very simple example is the Muslim faiths insistence that followers clean their face and hands every time they pray. The affect this simple practice had on Medieval health cannot be underestimated. Millions died of the Black Death in Europe - 50-80% of the population of Europe - as they did in the Middle East; however the percentage of the populace that died was far lower in Muslim countries - nearer 30%.

Yet all of the points raised above, whilst totally worthwhile, are not exclusive to these beliefs nor religious believers: They are attributes treasured by many people because they represent admirable traits in all humans. Their whole definition and practice are human traits, not religious ones.

For me, religions - and many other collective belief systems - work by making people do things that don't come naturally, like persecution, Crusades, suicide bombings, rather than actions that must, by the very nature that we are all alive today, be inherent in humans no matter what their beliefs; family, community, health, education, self-sustainability.

Religious apologists would say that without their faith, people are naturally selfish, lawless and greedy - and in some individuals they may be right. But if you look at any list of philanthropists, charitable donors or individuals acting selflessly, it is not an exclusively religious group. Therefore, the claim that religions are the sole preserve of a generosity of spirit and social support structure for the disadvantaged is patently untrue.

As a humanist, I would aim for possessing all of the attributes above in some way (perhaps not the attributes for Islam, Unitarian or Anglican) as these define the best features of precisely what group we all belong to - homo sapiens.
"Religious apologists would say that without their faith, people are naturally selfish, lawless and greedy - and in some individuals they may be right. But if you look at any list of philanthropists, charitable donors or individuals acting selflessly, it is not an exclusively religious group. Therefore, the claim that religions are the sole preserve of a generosity of spirit and social support structure for the disadvantaged is patently untrue."

Brilliant! Well said!
I would disagree about Catholicism - importance of education. Historically, the Church has not wanted lay people to be educated. In addition to the problems they have had with science.
Islam - oneness of faith, completely united

Although it may appear that Islam is a united religion from an American vantage point, in reality there are nearly as many fragmented groups in the Islamic religion as there are the other major world religions.

RSS

Latest Activity

Sir replied to Mongoose's discussion I Propose Removing Gender-Division in Bathrooms in the group The Great Debate
"I'm sorry, that's not quite it!  Try again!"
26 minutes ago
David R. commented on Herb Munson's group The Great Debate
"Roughshod, I hope you will examine the Men Supporting Men group in here."
1 hour ago
Dominic replied to Mongoose's discussion I Propose Removing Gender-Division in Bathrooms in the group The Great Debate
"I would say it's VERY UNBELIEVABLY OUT OF THIS WORLD cool."
1 hour ago
Sir replied to Mongoose's discussion I Propose Removing Gender-Division in Bathrooms in the group The Great Debate
"Understatement is cool."
1 hour ago
Sir commented on Herb Munson's group The Great Debate
"Sorry to see you go."
1 hour ago
Steve Valline replied to Ross Blaising's discussion Book
"Thanks for the update. Looking forward to more. If you want to discuss any points so far, I love those kind of discussions. But if you want to finish the book and stay in its frame of mind while you read, I totally get it. Cheers!"
2 hours ago
Liam Strain replied to Mongoose's discussion I Propose Removing Gender-Division in Bathrooms in the group The Great Debate
"It certainly *can* be a fallacy. But is not always. Certainly one can ask for reasonable evidence to back the fears. Assuming that this kind of ordinance is going to walk back child molestation laws, or public nudity laws is a stretch that I do not…"
3 hours ago
Liam Strain replied to Mongoose's discussion I Propose Removing Gender-Division in Bathrooms in the group The Great Debate
"That doesn't seem to be the case in the instance provided above. Where the private parties involved had come to an agreement for YEARS without complaint or seemingly any issue whatsoever. Until this teacher decided to make it an issue. This…"
3 hours ago

© 2016   Created by Brett McKay.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service