Freedom of Religion

This was inspired by the thread about the so-called satanist that got beat up and the case was to be tried as a hate crime on the basis that he was attacked because of his 'religious views'.

As far as I can see the only thing that makes an *Official* Religion is that it has over 100 members and is checked out and found to be allright with the IRS. My opinion is that if you're going to have Freedom of Religion than you have to respect anyone's idea of spirituality as a legitimate religion. On the other hand, I think that all religions should be considered cultish as well, on the grounds that they are all fantastical, and anyone whose primary motivation is unreality shouldn't be considered a rational member of society. But that's just me.
What do you think? What makes the difference between a "real" religion and a cult? and if such a distinction is to be made, should there be some things that are or are not covered under Freedom of Religion?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morning Glory

What do you think? What makes the difference between a "real" religion and a cult?

---

The size of their bank account.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morning Glory

if such a distinction is to be made, should there be some things that are or are not covered under Freedom of Religion?

---

As long as they are seperated from the political process (another point to be argued) then Freedom of Religion should be extended.

Interesting question. Under the Constitution, the government is prohibited from creating laws regarding the establishment of religion. Obviously, you are correct to state that this is in fact done thru laws relating to non-profit organizations, corporations and churches found it most state and federal tax laws.

Court decisions have tended to simply reiterate the laws on individuals with regards to religion. For example, a Native American Church was forbidden from using peyote on spiritual grounds. Some santeria groups are sanctioned under animal abuse statutes etc. I oppose some of these statutes, but clearly noone can enfringe on the rights of another then claim religion as justification.

I would have to have more clarity as to your definition of cult.

To me, a cult is a group that has somehow brainwashed or violated the free association rights of its members thru coercion or force. I see many religious groupings as perhaps unhealthy, but I believe that freedom often is the freedom for others to act in ways we find silly as long as they do not enfringe on us.

For the most part, I would apply the same statutes to any religion as I would to individual people. If there was clear and convincing evidence that they enfringed on the rights of others, they would lose their status. It must be mentioned, tho, that a cult is unlikely to apply for tax exempt status.

As to Satanism being recognized by the government: That refers mostly to a statute in a Military Chaplain's guidebook developed by Lieutinent Colonel Michael A Aquino (Temple of Set) when he was a member of the Church of Satan. From this, some rights have been ascribed to satanists in prison and other institutional settings. I am not aware of any Satanic organization applying for the actual tax exempt status. Anton LaVey himself was specifically for reinstating taxes on all churches. He refused to apply on these grounds.

It's hard to say where a religion ends and a cult begins. I believe it is subjective until an actual organization (and not just a few members) demonstrably violate the rights of fellow citizens.


OEC

i only have one thing to say

live & let live.
anyone who doesn't adhere to this religion should be shot!

Right now in the US tax-free status is what defines a "religious organization"
This means that ultra rich evangelicals pay no tax. Businesses owned by churches also get a break. Meanwhile the practice of Yoruba based religion such as Santeria is illegal in most states which see animal sacrifice as criminal. These same people allow the wholesale slaughter of entire species under the most horrible of conditions to feed the fast food corporations that dominate our landscape.

I don't think there is any difference between a cult & religion. Cults are religions seen as bad by another cult or religion. A cult is smaller, usually, and it just sounds cooler.

Freedom of religion should mean the PRACTICE of any religion is protected, not the bankroll of special interest corporations/government lobbys. We need a return to shamanistic ideals that will replace our cookie cutter Religion for the masses crap.

az

I find satanism really stupid. I mean it only exists because of the thing it preaches against, namely christianity.

Why don't the satanists just join the non-denominational church?

I saw Satan as just another archetype to work thru. Ultimately, I am a non-believing Orthodox Christian by virtue of birth and culture. I don't like Satanism as a religion, but my guess would be that they would oppose any religion regardless of denomination.

OEC

they're the same thing-
but in america anything not christian or an offshoot of it is a cult, or just EVIL
as far as the government defining religion- I thought we had a freedom of religion act, and separation of church and state act-
guess I missed the meeting they threw those out at-
oh well
God bless america, right- AND ONLY AMERICA!!!!

I've never felt a need for government sanction of my spiritual practices. I guess this is in part because I see any relationship one has with their spirtuality as completely personal. I tend to shy away from labelling it tho for obvious reasons. Even within Orthodox Christianity there is a huge body of dissent.

OEC

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OneEyedCat

I saw Satan as just another archetype to work thru.

OEC

---

its a real shame that we all don't treat our beliefs like so: believing in archetypes is a wonderful example of open mindedness.

Its damn difficult to do though, have you ever tried living a single day where you treat everything you see as mere concept, from the pedestrian crossings, to your clothes and perhaps other human beings too? You WILL go crazy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 23*

its a real shame that we all don't treat our beliefs like so: believing in archetypes is a wonderful example of open mindedness.

Its damn difficult to do though, have you ever tried living a single day where you treat everything you see as mere concept, from the pedestrian crossings, to your clothes and perhaps other human beings too? You WILL go crazy.

---

haha well obviously you can't treat all things as mere archetypes. For one, you'd get hit by the concept of car when crossing the concept of redlight:1orglaugh :thumb: I have a perspective on dark archetypes similar to russian moralists such as Dostoevsky. They have a use in your path thru life but even an archetype can be a trap.

OEC

but if only there were such a thing as polite suggestions.
There's an old parable that I find relevent alot of times, and this reminded me of it.
A man get's up on a soap box and preaches to the masses: "Come the revolution, we'll all eat strawberries!"
And another man steps up to him and says, "But I don't like strawberries."
and the preacher says: "Come the revolution, you WILL eat strawberries!"

My house is on the edge, I know nothing - Old Ukrainian Parable. There's no question we will all tend to exercise our freedoms below their "radar screen" so to speak. As much as I favor constitutional government, you only have that freedom which you take for yourself. The revolution may well come for you.

OEC

old irish parable:

How to become Invisible- Get a raven's heart,split it open with a black hafted knife, make three cuts and place a black bean in each cut. Then plant it and when the beans sprout put one in your mouth and say- By virtue of satans heart,and by strength of my great art, I desire to be invisible, and so it will be as long as the bean is kept in the mouth.

:1orglaugh
oh this isn't a parable??? who cares?! :1orglaugh

i always thought a cult was like a new religion just starting to get up on its feet. things just get derailed when killer koolaid is mentioned . correct me if im wrong but alot of the religions we have today started out as cults like the mormons, jehovas witnesses, and all the others that formed during protestant reformation against the catholic church

hey, Jim Jones is a pretty convicning guy, I read the transcript of his speech, and I almost wanted to drink some of that kool aid, he made a pretty strong case about why life sucks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KilLAtomiK

i always thought a cult was like a new religion just starting to get up on its feet. things just get derailed when killer koolaid is mentioned . correct me if im wrong but alot of the religions we have today started out as cults like the mormons, jehovas witnesses, and all the others that formed during protestant reformation against the catholic church

---

It really just depends how the world is being used. It is often used as a pejorative for religions and indivdual does not like.

OEC

From Yahoo news.

Sunday January 16, 5:13 PM

Villagers furious with Christian Missionaries


Samanthapettai, Jan 16 (ANI): Rage and fury has gripped this tsunami-hit tiny Hindu village in India's southern Tamil Nadu after a group of Christian missionaries allegedly refused them aid for not agreeing to follow their religion.

Samanthapettai, near the temple town of Madurai, faced near devastation on the December 26 when massive tidal waves wiped it clean of homes and lives.

Most of the 200 people here are homeless or displaced , battling to rebuild lives and locating lost family members besides facing risks of epidemic,disease and trauma.

Jubilant at seeing the relief trucks loaded with food, clothes and the much-needed medicines the villagers, many of who have not had a square meal in days, were shocked when the nuns asked them to convert before distributing biscuits and water.

Heated arguments broke out as the locals forcibly tried to stop the relief trucks from leaving. The missionaries, who rushed into their cars on seeing television reporters and the cameras refusing to comment on the incident and managed to leave the village.

Disappointed and shocked into disbelief the hapless villagers still await aid.

"Many NGOs (volunteer groups) are extending help to us but there in our village the NGO, which was till now helping us is now asking us to follow the Christian religion. We are staunch followers of Hindu religion and refused their request. And after that these people with their aid materials are leaving the village without distributing that to us," Rajni Kumar, a villager said.

The incident is an exception to concerted charity in a catastrophe that has left no one untouched

fucking religious nuts :grinning-

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 23*

From Yahoo news.

[I]Sunday January 16, 5:13 PM

Villagers furious with Christian Missionaries


Samanthapettai, Jan 16 (ANI): Rage and fury has gripped this tsunami-hit tiny Hindu village in India's southern Tamil Nadu after a group of Christian missionaries allegedly refused them aid for not agreeing to follow their religion.

---

being a christian i dont think thats what jesus would do and this story is a bit upseting

First, we need to correct the terminology. A cult and a religion cannot be compared because they are two different things. A religion is a system of beliefs, a cult is a body of people. What you are actually comparing is either a recognized religious institution and a cult, or a recognized religion and an unreckognized set of beliefs.

As far as institutions go, cults are primarily defined by seperating the members from any outside authority. A recognized religious organization is a group that gains the benifits of tax breaks. It gets fuzzy if you look to close, but that is because people learned to exploit the systems. LaVey gets my respect for getting a new religion recognized and accepted, it aint easy especially if you are not really a pranch of another religion.

As far as belief systems go, the ideal is that any religious practice you indulge in is ok as long as it does not infringe on the rights of others. No matter what the first amendment says, I will not be allowed to practice human sacrafice. The problem is, despite attempts to be a secular nation we are still steeped in christian traditions. This means things like animal sacrafice, drug use and other religious practices that go against the christian traditions get squashed, even if they do not infringe the rights of others. Any belief system can be a religion, but practice is limited by a combination of nescessity and tradition. Benifits very according to tax codes.

As far as I am concern, we won't get any real answers until we die, if then. Combined with the fact that you cannot disprove god, it is hard for me to knock anyones belief. For me at least my invisible man in the sky is no better than anyone elses. Only when your religion interferes with the lives of others do I care.

Wait a minute though. I missed it the first time through but why is he a 'so called satanist'? Do you have to join the fan club now? Is there a right way to be a satanist?

well I use the expression so-called, because he was victimised as "satanist" and he claimed to be anti-semitic, but I don't recalle him saying he was a member of the Church of Satan, or whether he affiliated himself with that group at all or not, so hence the "so-called" Satanist.

It did mention him being in the Church of Satan. He is also antisemitic.

OEC

"Tax the churches. Tax the churches into the ground."
- Frank Zappa