"Practice" religion?

[Bucky Ball]

Buddhism doesn't get a pass from me either. 

"Getting closer to that standard" 

Unfortunately that striving for a "higher standard" is the very thing that causes division in our species when it comes to religion. 

If one can accept there are good people in every religion, that says to me that the "standard" isn't in a label, not even in Buddhism. Asia's entire history all the way back to antiquity has also never been 100% violence free. 

Humans are doing it, both good and bad, labels have no magic powers. Asia also has prisons too.

Yes indeed. Those hoards of warrior Buddhist monks .. they were so fierce. 

How much division in our species has been caused by people with a bug up their ass, demanding their definition is the right one ?. That religion. 

[Brian37]

Buddhism doesn't get a pass from me either. 

"Getting closer to that standard" 

Unfortunately that striving for a "higher standard" is the very thing that causes division in our species when it comes to religion. 

If one can accept there are good people in every religion, that says to me that the "standard" isn't in a label, not even in Buddhism. Asia's entire history all the way back to antiquity has also never been 100% violence free. 

Humans are doing it, both good and bad, labels have no magic powers. Asia also has prisons too.

Yes indeed. Those hoards of warrior Buddhist monks .. they were so fierce. 

How much division in our species has been caused by people with a bug up their ass, demanding their definition is the right one ?. That religion. 

If I was excluding the word "atheist" you'd have a case. But show me where in this thread I ever claimed that atheists should "practice" being atheists. Not even that is a "practice" it is a mere position on one claim. Not even that word "atheist" should be seen as a "practice".

You are either a good person, or you are not. There is nothing to "practice" as far as avoiding harm to others. Labels do not have magic powers to cause someone to only do good.

You follow a religion. But there is no "practice" to be had in knowing humans are all capable of both doing good and bad.

[onlinebiker]

Practice makes perfect.

"Practicing a profession" does not mean "trying to do it well".

Practice doe NOT make perfect.


If that were true - with all the practice I' ve had over the years jacking off - I would be able to finish in one stoke.

---

Ugggg...... To get to the degree on your wall, you have to go to school and earn that degree. Yea I agree, learn first, get it right then work on me. 

"Practice" as far as a private licence does not mean the same thing. Just like theists confuse "law" as lawgiver like congress, when science uses law differently.

I get what you are implying here, but the word "practice" as used by lawyers and doctors does not imply using clients as guinea pigs. 

That reminds me of the time when I took my mother to a heart doctor, and in the exam room he had that stupid reproduction painting of Jesus standing behind the doctor guiding his hands. All I could fucking think at that moment was, "If you cut my mother open, the only thing I want you focused on is her."

That also reminds me of what Captain Sully said after landing the passenger jet on the Hudson when asked by a reporter if he said a prayer, "I didn't have time." I always loved that, reporter didn't expect that sane response.

Ya really don' t get the concept of humor - do ya?

[Brian37]

Practice makes perfect.

"Practicing a profession" does not mean "trying to do it well".

Practice doe NOT make perfect.


If that were true - with all the practice I' ve had over the years jacking off - I would be able to finish in one stoke.

---

Ugggg...... To get to the degree on your wall, you have to go to school and earn that degree. Yea I agree, learn first, get it right then work on me. 

"Practice" as far as a private licence does not mean the same thing. Just like theists confuse "law" as lawgiver like congress, when science uses law differently.

I get what you are implying here, but the word "practice" as used by lawyers and doctors does not imply using clients as guinea pigs. 

That reminds me of the time when I took my mother to a heart doctor, and in the exam room he had that stupid reproduction painting of Jesus standing behind the doctor guiding his hands. All I could fucking think at that moment was, "If you cut my mother open, the only thing I want you focused on is her."

That also reminds me of what Captain Sully said after landing the passenger jet on the Hudson when asked by a reporter if he said a prayer, "I didn't have time." I always loved that, reporter didn't expect that sane response.

Ya really don' t get the concept of humor - do ya?

Text is not as easy to read as face to face voice  or facial expressions. 

It still remains if someone is cutting into me I don't want them thinking about anything but their job.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

No, John practices law. Jim follows a religion.

Law, at least in the west is intended to protect pluralism equally. Jim follows a religion because he think he got it right.

Sure you can get degrees in theology, but to me that is like being an expert in Star Wars or Harry Potter.

"Follow" a religion is an honest word. "Practice"  a religion, is merely a dodge to justify your own personal bias when it comes to thinking your label is the origin of human behaviors.

Certainly someone can spend tons of time absorbing a religion, but that is still following. 

John can practice law being a Jew or a Christian, and Mustafa can also practice law in America and practice law. But a priest or Rabbi or Cleric are following a religion.  

The word "Practice" as used by holy people or followers, isn't an honest admission that they merely like what they believe. Follow is an honest word.

This is getting silly.  There is no sensible distinction between what Jim and John are doing.  If there were - under your petty usage - it would be impossible for anyone to 'follow' the law.

Boru

[Brian37]

No, John practices law. Jim follows a religion.

Law, at least in the west is intended to protect pluralism equally. Jim follows a religion because he think he got it right.

Sure you can get degrees in theology, but to me that is like being an expert in Star Wars or Harry Potter.

"Follow" a religion is an honest word. "Practice"  a religion, is merely a dodge to justify your own personal bias when it comes to thinking your label is the origin of human behaviors.

Certainly someone can spend tons of time absorbing a religion, but that is still following. 

John can practice law being a Jew or a Christian, and Mustafa can also practice law in America and practice law. But a priest or Rabbi or Cleric are following a religion.  

The word "Practice" as used by holy people or followers, isn't an honest admission that they merely like what they believe. Follow is an honest word.

This is getting silly.  There is no sensible distinction between what Jim and John are doing.  If there were - under your petty usage - it would be impossible for anyone to 'follow' the law.

Boru

Laws based on religion are called theocracy. That is the difference.

Laws based on common interests can be agreed upon regardless of personal bias.

If the law is the agreed speed limit on a given highway is 55mph and a Jew and Muslim and Christian and Atheist all come to that same conclusion, then the "law" is common. You don't need to "practice" going 55mph, and base that on a old book. You either do or you don't stay under the posted speed limit.

[tackattack]

Wow that’s a lot of words you’re putting in my mouth.
A.my “ goodness”, or subjective morality, comes from me.
B. I’m not big on practicing a lot of dogmatic rituals, mostly I just try and practice patience.

[Brian37]

Wow that’s a lot of words you’re putting in my mouth.
A.my “ goodness”, or subjective morality, comes from me.
B. I’m not big on practicing a lot of dogmatic rituals, mostly I just try and practice patience.

Yes your subjective morality DOES come from you, so why do you feel the need to believe books written by people who didn't know where the sun went at night?

You don't need to "Practice" believing in magic babies with super powers. Just like you don't need to "Practice" believing Thor makes lightening.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

This is getting silly.  There is no sensible distinction between what Jim and John are doing.  If there were - under your petty usage - it would be impossible for anyone to 'follow' the law.

Boru

Laws based on religion are called theocracy. That is the difference.

Laws based on common interests can be agreed upon regardless of personal bias.

If the law is the agreed speed limit on a given highway is 55mph and a Jew and Muslim and Christian and Atheist all come to that same conclusion, then the "law" is common. You don't need to "practice" going 55mph, and base that on a old book. You either do or you don't stay under the posted speed limit.

No, laws based on religion are not called theocracy. A government in which a religious body is the source of authority is a theocracy,  but that's not the point.  One can be a lawyer in a theocratic society.  This, in fact, pretty much destroys your argument. If John does what he does in a theocracy, he's still 'practicing' law, not 'following religion'.

It's pretty naïve to think that secular laws are agreed upon regardless of personal bias.

You really should look up the following words:  Practice, follow, theocracy, law, religion.

Boru

[Brian37]

Laws based on religion are called theocracy. That is the difference.

Laws based on common interests can be agreed upon regardless of personal bias.

If the law is the agreed speed limit on a given highway is 55mph and a Jew and Muslim and Christian and Atheist all come to that same conclusion, then the "law" is common. You don't need to "practice" going 55mph, and base that on a old book. You either do or you don't stay under the posted speed limit.

No, laws based on religion are not called theocracy. A government in which a religious body is the source of authority is a theocracy,  but that's not the point.  One can be a lawyer in a theocratic society.  This, in fact, pretty much destroys your argument. If John does what he does in a theocracy, he's still 'practicing' law, not 'following religion'.

It's pretty naïve to think that secular laws are agreed upon regardless of personal bias.

You really should look up the following words:  Practice, follow, theocracy, law, religion.

Boru

No, humans need to accept we are not a separate species. "Practice" isn't the same as admitting you merely like something. "Practice" is the theist trying to treat a mere like as if it is a tool, and not a mere like. "Follow" is an honest admission.

If "practice" were a valid word to describe a label, then why don't we hear a majority of atheists saying they "practice" being "off". Because "off" is a position, not a "practice".