Organized Religion & personal Spirituality

Wonderfully written. Its refreshing to see someon who belives god has a plan, and then doesn't turn around and claim to know the plan using it as a means to tell others that they are wrong.
Bringing this back to our original topic I think that is what is wrong with church, whatever flavor it may be.
I personally don't like to be told what to think about a subject (religion) on which I have as much proof as the person giving the orders(be they preist, rabbi, pastor, etc)
I also cannot accept their veiws on a book that is supposed to be beyond questioning( bible, torah,koran) but falls up short in so many places.

You are an Islamic person living in TEXAS and you don't see why separation of church and state is a good thing!?!?!?This separation allows you to worship your god, even if its not the same god that the majority of America, and even without looking at the numbers I have a hunch Islam is not the most common religion in America, much less Texas.While they are separate they do influence each other. Its just easier to see change in an institution that historically has been morally inert.This message has been edited by AdminPhat, 04-07-2005 02:11 AM

"I get a few looks from people that worry me"
Be happy that the seperation of church and state resricts them to only looks. If the US became a religious state it would undoubtably become an Eveangelical Christian one (heck it almost is already), and then looks would be the least of your problems. Remember the attacks nationwide after 9/11, thats what happened when that type of activity was illegal!!!"An Islamic state may require certain ways, but those do not preclude practicing other religions in peace."An Islamic state, by defintion, would preclude practicing other religions in peace."The Christians, Muslims and Jews could probably agree on common moral laws"
They already did,
murder is bad
stealing is bad
unprovoked violence is bad
and if you commit adultry, that woman you hate gets half your stuff.
ta da!This message has been edited by StormWolfx2x, 04-08-2005 03:03 AM

I think the only reason we have disagreement is because we both think of "moral laws" a bit differently.What kind of meant is that the laws we have are the only things that the overwhelming majority of people can agree are wrong (whether they be moral issues or not, I think that really depends on personal definition of moral issues), once you step out off crimes that have a victim, then its a lot harder for the people of a large diverse population to reach a consensus.

im gonna stand up for schraf for a second here, even though Im sure she will say the same thing when she responds."You can do this in Saudi Arabia in an American compound, but this would not be appropriate in public, because you would be setting an example of putting materialistic pleasures above obedience of the Quran."She has said numerous times that she is not an Islamic woman, so in an Islamic state with true freedom of religion, if her religion (or lack thereof) allowed her to drink in public places then doing so would okay, not allowing her to drink would violate her right to practice her religion in peace."A woman who faithfully follows the teachings would not want to do as you say. That is not a restriction of freedom. It is a proper way of life."True, a woman who faithfully follows the teachings of Quran would not want to do as she says, BUT SHE is NOT ISLAMIC, if you force her to follow religious standards you ARE restricting her freedom, and saying your religious veiws are proper while hers are not is religious oppression."I understand that you do not understand. You probably think the same thought about me."I know you don't understand what she is saying becuase you are taking what she says and applying it to an Islamic woman, you have to do this because if you weren't applying it to an Islamic woman, you would be contradicting yourself.This message has been edited by AdminPhat, 04-12-2005 12:26 AM

How ridiculously convenient, Islamic people in Islamic countries want their governing powers to be Islamic. Not having this separation is fine for the people who are in power, but would these same Muslims still not want separation of church and state when they live in is controlled by a non Islamic church? When the church in control of your state tells you that you have to practice their religion you can get back to me on how great not having a separation of church and state is. We do separate authorities in the U.S., its called checks and balances, and it’s a great way to keep tyrants from having absolute power, what would your one authority do when a person rises to the top, changes hats, and then no one has the power to oppose them? You said earlier that You support forcing non-Muslims into American compounds!?!?! (I guess since its American they would then actually enjoy a level of freedom) Who’s shoving who into a closet? If you think it’s difficult in a country that has a separation of church and state, imagine how hard it would be in a country that did not have separation and was not Islamic. When you directly contradict yourself, you do tend to go in circles. Note from Admin: Reminding you that the topic is organized religion and personal spirituality. Try not to get political. Thanks. PBThis message has been edited by AdminPhat, 04-12-2005 03:29 AM

"The truth is that we do not need religion to develop spiritually."Agreed."Religion is not the goal; it is just a tool."If you are a person that needs relgion to achive spirtuality than sure, I'd contest though that religion is a poor tool for achiving sprituality as it is to contristing and does not allow enough spritual freedom, at least for me."Many people find it difficult to accept, but in fact religion is a human invention."Im sure of that, and I would also add that God is a human invention."Spirituality on the other hand is a universal, godly existence
that is the core of life and not at its edge."To me (changed words capitalized)-
Spirituality on the other hand is THE universal, HUMAN existence
that is the core of life and not at its edge."BTW StormKingx2x...Is not Saudi Arabia a Theocracy?"its Stormwolf ;P. and can you please rephrase this and quote something I said that this was a response to, I just want to be completely clear as to what your trying to ask before I respond

"Actually it's a bunch of people who are a bit miffed that a Muslim feels so superior that he has the right to impose his "ways" on other people whether they like it or not."what "miffs" me is that he was saying we should all adopt muslim ways and was at the same using the guise of freedom of religion. I have much less of a problem with someone telling me that they think their way is right, then when someone tells me that I have the freedom to choose what I think is right as long as I come up with the same conclusion they do.

"You won't convince me that God is merely an invention of the human mind. I like and respect human achievment, but I will never humanize the Creator while lifting up human wisdom."Similarly you won't convince me that god exists, and I don’t think either one of us is going to change our minds, but I think that one of us forcing the other to agree with us is not the answer.Can we at least agree on that?If yes, then like you said religion is just a tool not the goal, if I use a different tool (human wisdom) to achieve the same goal then nothing else we disagree on really matters because we both end up in the same place.