Freedom to practice your religion -

[nycflasher]

Originally posted by gop_jeff
I disagree. To qualify as a cult, the religion would have to fall "under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader." I would hardly call Moses, Jesus, or Buddha authoritarian. I don't know the origins of Hinduism, but I'm guessing it wouldn't qualify either. Islam... maybe. But its widespread following would disqualify it from being a cult, as it is not "generally considered to be extremist or false" - although that depends on the definition of the word "Generally."

Agreed. I think you are on to something, though, fuzzywuzzy. I'm going to take a stab at this without further exploring the word's definitions, but rather their larger meanings:

You cannot equate religionand cult, but they are very similar.
The Fundamentalist Islam that terrorists practice is really more in line with the cultish ways of whatshisname who got hundreds of people to drink that suicidal koolaid down in Jonestown.
I kind of think of cults as religions gone bad. I'm not sure that cults are by definition always bad though.
Secretive, and unconventional, but not fundamentally bad neccesarily.

Am I close?

:

 

[5stringJeff]

I would say secretive, unconventional, and maybe even separatist, but I would also add the authoriarian leader part. Also, I would add that most cults warn its followers of dire consequences if they leave the cult - excommunication to the point of not talking to ex-members, threats against the person's property and/or person, and the worst possible eternal judgments.

 

[nycflasher]

Originally posted by gop_jeff
I would say secretive, unconventional, and maybe even separatist, but I would also add the authoriarian leader part. Also, I would add that most cults warn its followers of dire consequences if they leave the cult - excommunication to the point of not talking to ex-members, threats against the person's property and/or person, and the worst possible eternal judgments.

Okay. While I left the door open, I can't really think of a cult that is good. Mainly I think of Charles Manson, David Koresh and the Jonestown Massacre.

But when I think of some of my favorite movies, classics like the Rocky Horror Picture Show, they are considered "cult classics." Which left me thinking, is there a definition of "cult" with a more innocuos meaning?

 

[tim_duncan2000]

I think these people go too far, and the kid can't make the decision (and I doubt the parents make it very easy when they probably tell them how they will go to hell if they do it). That doesn't seem very fair to me. I also think that about these people who will only pray for them and won't let them see doctors.

 

[mattskramer]

Okay. It may have been easy for you to conclude that the child's life comes before the parents' religious values since, after all, it is the child. Consider those who take the New Testament's avocation of peace (the "turn the other cheek" attitude) seriously. They don't think that they should be obligated to pay taxes because much of their tax money would go to create weapons and promote wars. It is against their religious values to support such activity. Should they be obligated to pay tax if by doing so, the government is, in a sense, prohibiting their free exercise of their religion?

 

[NewGuy]

Originally posted by mattskramer
Okay. It may have been easy for you to conclude that the child's life comes before the parents' religious values since, after all, it is the child. Consider those who take the New Testament's avocation of peace (the "turn the other cheek" attitude) seriously. They don't think that they should be obligated to pay taxes because much of their tax money would go to create weapons and promote wars. It is against their religious values to support such activity. Should they be obligated to pay tax if by doing so, the government is, in a sense, prohibiting their free exercise of their religion?

The problem here is multifaceted:

"Render unto Caesar what is Caesars." and the other statements regarding taxes are quite clear. If it is law, regarding taxes, follow it. If God's law is made overridden by government, follow God's law.

The REAL questions this produces are twofold:

1. Are the taxes truly Constitutional (the income tax as currently instituted is NOT)
2. Is the belief (even correct) a protected religious belief?

I guess in your example, it would have to be shown that their true spiritual belief is that these taxes should not be paid and maybe the money ought to be redirected to public treasuries for road building or something to keep the legallity safe all the way around.

To my way of thinking, that keeps all angles legal, repsected, proper, and not encroached upon.

 

[acludem]

My issue with age of consent laws is that some states are now trying kids as young as 11 as adults for violent crimes. This means the state believes an 11 year old can be held to adult standards of mental competency to understand the consequences of an action. Surely if an 11 year old (or 12 or 13 or 14 year old for that matter) can understand what it is to kill someone then they can understand what consenting to sex is. I don't know if we should raise the age when we try kids as adults or lower the age of consent. Right now, the law as it stands is hypocritical and contradictory. It clearly needs to be changed so that we have a consistent standard.

I would also point out that it is not just Jehoveh's Witnesses that have disallowed medical care for children. There are other sects of Christianity as well as other religions that believe in faith healing and refuse to allow modern medicine to help them.

acludem

 

[NewGuy]

Originally posted by acludem

I would also point out that it is not just Jehoveh's Witnesses that have disallowed medical care for children. There are other sects of Christianity as well as other religions that believe in faith healing and refuse to allow modern medicine to help them.

acludem

-And I would point out that unless it was immediately life threatening with no other recourse at all, then the government has no business with it.

They have no right to tell me I cannot fix my own families diseases just because I don't pay the a fee every year and believe their false science.

If you would disagree with the legal aspect, I have a nice little story about an experience Patrick Henry had regarding a preacher scourged for not taking a license.

 

[acludem]

I believe parents shouldn't be allowed to practice their religion on their children. There was a horrific story about a little boy who died from an ear infection which was left untreated and spread to his brain causing him to die a slow, and massively painful death. His parents prayed and prayed, but refused to allow him to take the penicillin that would've saved his life. Was this child given a choice? Do you think he would have preferred take the penicillin to dying in severe pain?

acludem

 

[Avatar4321]

Originally posted by dilloduck
I love this debate---now I personally would tell the parents to shove it and try to safe the childs life HOWEVER--what these parents are concerned about is the immortal soul. What if by saving the life of the child they lose their immortal souls and the soul of the child?

I think God is alot more merciful than alot of people give him credit for. God is also a God of law and order. He he keeps the laws of God, will keep the law of the land becuase it is only by the will of God that such laws are established. The scriptures are clear that we should submit to the laws of the land if required. And if the laws of the land are unjust we seek to Change them or if God has to intervene he will deliver the people from bondage.

 

[Avatar4321]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
apply for your sex licenses here please
<---------------------------------------

Thats essentiallly what a part of marriage is. the legal right to procreate.

I mean we need a license to operate simple machinery and yet the ability to create life is used and abused by everyone. Its deep if you think about it.

 

[KLSuddeth]

apply for your sex licenses here please

ummmm think NOT old man (ie asshole)

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by NewGuy
-And I would point out that unless it was immediately life threatening with no other recourse at all, then the government has no business with it.

They have no right to tell me I cannot fix my own families diseases just because I don't pay the a fee every year and believe their false science.

If you would disagree with the legal aspect, I have a nice little story about an experience Patrick Henry had regarding a preacher scourged for not taking a license.

"...false science..."? False by what standard?

 

[NewGuy]

Originally posted by acludem
I believe parents shouldn't be allowed to practice their religion on their children. There was a horrific story about a little boy who died from an ear infection which was left untreated and spread to his brain causing him to die a slow, and massively painful death. His parents prayed and prayed, but refused to allow him to take the penicillin that would've saved his life. Was this child given a choice? Do you think he would have preferred take the penicillin to dying in severe pain?

acludem

If this is what you believe and the very reason why you believe it, you must understand why it is that this is your primary example.

You have a false bill of goods here. An ear infection is most commonly NOT fixed by antibiotics. In fact, in nearly all cases, ear infections can and DO go away on their own.

In addition, if you want to rid yourself of the suffering, garlic oil applied inside the ear directly, has an incredibly HIGHER success rate and usually causes the infection to be totally gone in 3 days.

Taken internally, the appropriate intake of garlic does a similar thing.

You believe what you do because you trust a corrupt system for your information without proving the science or the intent OF the system.

This point with the garlic makes your big brother justification null and void.

 

[NewGuy]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
"...false science..."? False by what standard?

See above.

 

[dilloduck]

Then why in the hell didnt the parents do that instead of letting the child die? Were they following scripture?---oh ya--they don't understand it as well as you say you do. What branch of christianity do you belong to?

 

[NewGuy]

Originally posted by dilloduck
Then why in the hell didnt the parents do that instead of letting the child die? Were they following scripture?---oh ya--they don't understand it as well as you say you do. What branch of christianity do you belong to?

If you think you know more than I do on the subject, show me where the Bible indicates you must ONLY use prayer for healing?

 

[dilloduck]

Never said I knew more-----YOU are the only one here who knows the truth---Remember??? Everyone else has the wrong religion ar wrong interpretation. How do you find the speck in everyones elses eye with that boulder in yours?

 

[NewGuy]

Originally posted by dilloduck
Never said I knew more-----YOU are the only one here who knows the truth---Remember??? Everyone else has the wrong religion ar wrong interpretation. How do you find the speck in everyones elses eye with that boulder in yours?

Well, you ought to READ your speck and boulder reference, since it is misqouted by you. I find it funny and appropriate the following verses.
Matthew 7:

3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.
6 Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.
7 Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:
8 For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.

If finding fault with teachings is in context with this, maybe you could point to where?

If you equate to false teachings, somebody personally, you have problems.

Anytime you have anything to say and have no proof I must choose to regard it as an antagonistic attempt and the mere noise of methane escaping from a small overtight oriface.

 

[5stringJeff]

dillo, for a less Shakespearian version of that text, try this.