What Gives You Peace....

[vulcanlogician]

The point is, all religious groups are coercive to some degree (even if it's very minor).

Fixed that for you… 😊 As I may have mentioned before, I’m a rather shitty example of Chrisitian living, as in, I am not a regular church-goer nor do I adhere rigidly to any doctrines (though I may passionately advocate for them in a discussion forum)…hence my choice to identify as a “non-denominational Christian.”

...

That said, there is a lot of bullshit in every church. And that’s because there’s just a lot of bullshit in every group for the art leagues to quilters’ guilds.

That's funny, because a lot of people who identify as "non-denominational" in my hometown (Appalachian culture) are hard core Pentacostal. But I know you aren't. You kinda remind me of a Catholic, tbh.

Anyway, you make an excellent point. "Social groups" in general have a laundry list of foibles. Even completely secular social structures (like high school cliques) often include certain people being ostracized for arbitrary reasons. Any time there is a social dynamic (particularly in larger groups and ideologies) there is going to be some baggage.

I do feel that the coercive element is a bit stronger in religious groups than in "normal" social groups... a bit more institutionalized. But that doesn't bother me too much. The bigger gripe is that religious groups often call their pettiness and bigotry by tender names (or sometimes even exalted, holy names) . At least a high school clique has the self-awareness of knowing its own pettiness is pettiness.

"Less self-aware than a high school clique," is a serious criticism...

But you made another good point: it's a criticism that can only be leveled at a certain kind of "less enlightened" religion. It's unfair to paint all religion with that same brush. It's tempting to do so, though, because the worst religion has to offer is often the most loudmouthed. And (according to them) they speak for God. Perhaps too many atheists take them on their word on that account.


PS: Your placement of ellipses when you last quoted me seriously misrepresented the views of William James.