Disregarding our heritage

[rideforever]

I recently heard an arguement that we should be more respectful to religion because our elders and those who took over north america were religous.

My blood comes from a nazi. Should I respect that heritage?

Some north americans have blood that comes from slave owners and lynchers. Should their children follow the same values?

These are drastic examples, but just to show that we as humans make mistakes. The only thing worse than creating a flawed system is continueing to support it aka having faith and ignoring it's flaws when they arise. Our society should be continously moving towards a utopian state, getting rid of things that cause harm and getting more things that are good. Too bad religion seems to discourage any major change in society. Is that true? Have you ever heard of a religion supporting a major change?

50ish years ago...
Did they support those who wanted to treat non-whites as people?
Did they support those who wanted to treat women as people?

Do they lag decades behind most major changes? why? Is it cause they'll have to change their interpretations of those old books and the only way to do that without looking too phoney is to wait untill everyone agrees in the change and it's impossible for them to stick with the old values?

[justmyopinion]

I think if they show there is a change needed in their views and the Bible, they may be afraid people will start to doubt more and more what they are teaching....you know the old "well, if my religion was wrong about how to treat woman and colored folk, what else is it wrong about???"

Just a guess

[janalta]

I fairly recently heard this same arguement from a friend and it basically made my blood boil.
Indeed it was Christian Missionaries who came into the Okanagan valley and TOOK the land from the natives, then stripped them of their identity and culture, dismissing their spiritual beliefs and brainwashing them into becoming good christians.
Is that really something we should be proud of and honor ??
Should we also honor those who used Japense slave labor to build the railroad through the valley?

History isn't always something that should be celebrated, it is full of repression, prejudice and human rights violations...for the most part, in the name of religion.

Of course religion does not support major change. Free thinking, free will....the church has never wanted that and never will. People who bring about change are independant free thinkers, who are not as likely to believe the tales that christians have been trying to brainwash people into buying for so long.

[subversionist]

I recently heard an arguement that we should be more respectful to religion because our elders and those who took over north america were religous.

My blood comes from a nazi. Should I respect that heritage?

Some north americans have blood that comes from slave owners and lynchers. Should their children follow the same values?

These are drastic examples, but just to show that we as humans make mistakes. The only thing worse than creating a flawed system is continueing to support it aka having faith and ignoring it's flaws when they arise. Our society should be continously moving towards a utopian state, getting rid of things that cause harm and getting more things that are good. Too bad religion seems to discourage any major change in society. Is that true? Have you ever heard of a religion supporting a major change?

50ish years ago...
Did they support those who wanted to treat non-whites as people?
Did they support those who wanted to treat women as people?

Do they lag decades behind most major changes? why? Is it cause they'll have to change their interpretations of those old books and the only way to do that without looking too phoney is to wait untill everyone agrees in the change and it's impossible for them to stick with the old values?

I admit I haven't put too much work into a response, but I would contend that there are many examples of "religious" folk organizing, and promoting, and even headlining positive social change. I do conceed that there are also examples to the contrary (religious systems and people that stand in the way of positive social change), but I highly disagree with a sweeping generalization that all religious people and systems are holding back positive social change.

For example: Who led the campains for civil rights in the USA 50 years ago? Martin Luther King (a Christian Minister) and Malcolm X (Islam). Both attested to religion as motivation for their stand and were even willing to suffer for it. Who led the campaign to stand up against oppression and the tyranny of foreign rule in India, while advocating for society's neglected? Mahatma Gandhi who was motivated by his Hindu heritage. Who pushed for years in the British parliament the abolition of slavery? William Wilberforce (motivated by his Christian faith). There are major movements today in religious circles advocating social justice, gay rights, environmental responsibility, disarmament, etc.

[1nick]

subversionist did you read my post with the link,munk debate blair vs hitchens??
not much of a leg to stand on

[Nom_de_Plume]

For most of us Canadians we came here to escape political/religious persecution or a way to break out of the caste system of another country.
Some of us came here just to escape the horror of violence that was erupting in our home country.

This country was founded on tolerance for the most part. Everyone was welcome no matter what your race/religion or caste was.
We came here to make a better life from the one we left behind, and a lot of us left our heritage at the door and embraced whatever the going thing was here in Canada at the time, because we were just so happy to be here.

Regardless of what the original settlers religious beliefs were, I think their core value was trying to create a community where everyone could live.

[rideforever]

J-MO: Agreed. Since they don't use science or logic to back up their claims, all they have is their word. I think once they admit that could be wrong, they lose all credibility.

Janalta: I was gonna say 'colonized' or 'discovered', but then decided 'took over' was more suiting.

Subversionist: You make good arguement. But wasn't pretty much everyone religous back then? If most people are religous, then odds are, the heros were religous too. The religion as a whole could have still had a negative impact on the change, despite a few members going against the majority. I guess thats what this comes down to. Do the people who use religion to encourage change outweigh the people who use it to fight it? Or maybe... does the religions official stance on the issue fight change or support it? How long after women got the right to vote were they allowed into more important roles in the church? I think Bruce Lee is a good example. He taught kung-fu to white people in america. The kung-fu association as a whole faught this change. Bruce over-powered the association and made the change happen, that doesnt mean the association was responsible for the change, they still faught it and probably slowed down the progress.

Nom: Yup, thats why my elders came over here... run away from war-mongers... I think. I like thinking of this place as one where people came to run away from lands with too many rules. Kinda makes me laugh in a bit of a disgusted way when I think about how many over-burdoning laws we now have, and even worse, the u.s., land of the free, having more people locked in little cages than any other country.

[sooperphreek]

there is a fundamental thing that we hold dear to. separation of church from state. i find that i am being persecuted and subjugated more and more by our "governments" (or the state) and it has nothing to do with the church. HST anyone? Free Trade anyone? the government ignore us and we dont seem to have half the animosity towards the "state" as we seem to be able to conjure up against the "churches". we have the same mentality in society as most people in church - if i pray it away it will go away. well the same mentality is used in a different way through the state mentality - if i use my one vote i create change and i can live with it. that mentality on both counts is rediculous to me. kinda like that commercial where the guy drops his cell in the urinal and picks it up to use again and the guy beside him says "really??". i dont get why we are so willing to be blinded by the whole "one vote" nonsense. things wont change with just votes or the fantasy of democracy. people have to make change and they are not always glamourous or right. most of the US founders had slaves (wrong to do)....but they had a great ideal in writing that the country clings to till this day (nice thing to have). there is nothing wrong to be proud of the "good" of your heritage despite the bad. those same nazi's (a political party) and germans brought us into the jet age of flying. not to mention alot of other mechanical advantages through war which we can not live without today. nazi-ism = bad, but there was good too. just like there are alot of things that christians did that were not acceptable in retrospect but had positive changes nonetheless. abolitionists for slavery etc was a good thing. and most of those people were religious. i guess i hope for a revolution in much the same way that john lennon sang about...im not gonna bomb something like the guy in oklahoma. but id love to see some change for the better in both the church AND the state.

[Captain Awesome]

I think you guys are confusing heritage and personal preferences.

Being Christian ISN'T heritage, it's personal preference. Being a Nazi is a political affiliation, and not part of your heritage. Some people choose to be Nazi or Christian, but their heritage is German or Italian, or East Indian. Gone are the days when being from England meant you're Catholic.

[sleepdeprived]

I have to disagree Cap'n.
Christianity is considered by many to be an aspect of their cultural heritage.

I think the point is that culture can be, but is not necessarily a shared thing. The dominant culture inevitably has a few goose steppers who believe that all should comply with their wishes and practices but those folks should be ignored. They're usually xenophobes.

[subversionist]

subversionist did you read my post with the link,munk debate blair vs hitchens??
not much of a leg to stand on

I watched part of the debate. I'm familiar with the argument. Without a doubt many have used religion as justification, even motivation for evil acts. There is absolutely no justification for that.

My response is my own story:

Without a doubt, I know I am a better, more informed human being because of my faith community. I am a more faithful husband and father because of the encouragement and accountability I receive. I am a better neighbor and citizen. I am not one to simply buy the party line. What I discovered is that my faith tradition (Christianity) is very diverse. Those who get the press are usually the worse examples. And if you have an open mind and humble heart there are pearls of wisdom to be found in the life and teachings of Jesus Christ (even if you don't believe in his existence and think the church is an evil institution). I would argue that religion (both the doctrine and faith community) has been a source for good in my life. I believe even Christopher Hitchens, whose intelligence far surpasses mine, would have a challenge debating that.

I guarantee if I hadn't encountered the wisdom and encouragement of my faith tradition I would be living a more narcissistic/selfish and socially destructive life. None of our heritages are perfect. In fact, we can all look back and see the mistakes our ancestors have made. I absolutely abhor the crimes suffered by our first nations people at the hands of those bearing the stamp of the church and our Canadian government. I am deeply saddened and angered when we hear stories of Canadian soldiers who commit crimes against civilians and prisoners in Afghanistan (We hope these are isolated rogue incidents and not the common practice of our military). Because of the misdeeds of a minority should I denounce my Canadian heritage? Or should I not celebrate the positive contributions of my heritage, such as the way (as was mentioned above) our country protects the rights of all its citizens regardless of race, creed, gender, or net worth.

Peace

[1nick]

subversionist did you read my post with the link,munk debate blair vs hitchens??
not much of a leg to stand on

I watched part of the debate. I'm familiar with the argument. Without a doubt many have used religion as justification, even motivation for evil acts. There is absolutely no justification for that.

My response is my own story:

Without a doubt, I know I am a better, more informed human being because of my faith community. I am a more faithful husband and father because of the encouragement and accountability I receive. I am a better neighbor and citizen. I am not one to simply buy the party line. What I discovered is that my faith tradition (Christianity) is very diverse. Those who get the press are usually the worse examples. And if you have an open mind and humble heart there are pearls of wisdom to be found in the life and teachings of Jesus Christ (even if you don't believe in his existence and think the church is an evil institution). I would argue that religion (both the doctrine and faith community) has been a source for good in my life. I believe even Christopher Hitchens, whose intelligence far surpasses mine, would have a challenge debating that.

I guarantee if I hadn't encountered the wisdom and encouragement of my faith tradition I would be living a more narcissistic/selfish and socially destructive life. None of our heritages are perfect. In fact, we can all look back and see the mistakes our ancestors have made. I absolutely abhor the crimes suffered by our first nations people at the hands of those bearing the stamp of the church and our Canadian government. I am deeply saddened and angered when we hear stories of Canadian soldiers who commit crimes against civilians and prisoners in Afghanistan (We hope these are isolated rogue incidents and not the common practice of our military). Because of the misdeeds of a minority should I denounce my Canadian heritage? Or should I not celebrate the positive contributions of my heritage, such as the way (as was mentioned above) our country protects the rights of all its citizens regardless of race, creed, gender, or net worth.

Peace

subversionist, your own story is a good example of what religion can be,its too bad many in religion don't subsribe to what you say,many non-believers do.
what troubles me is that the top representatives of religion demonstrate that religion is not a cause for good,mainly the pope.
I won't go into his track record but most no how he handled priest child rapists,"sweep 'em under the rug"
and where does one start with bill donohue?

[subversionist]

what troubles me is that the top representatives of religion demonstrate that religion is not a cause for good,mainly the pope. I won't go into his track record but most no how he handled priest child rapists,"sweep 'em under the rug" and where does one start with bill donohue?

Wow, I hadn't been aquainted with Bill Donohue! I don't have respect for anyone who defends child abusers, or minimizes their atrocities. There is no excuse for the systematic protection of abusers in the Catholic church.

One reality (and danger) is that people often value institutions above other people. Religious institutions can be just as guilty of this as business corporations. The reputation of the institution is more important than doing the right thing.

My faith community is far from perfect either-I will readily conceed that (I'm not Catholic). There have been (rare thankfully) occasions of infidelity from leaders. I am satisfied with the way the faith community has dealt with these cases openly, with appropriate discipline (Offenders are reported to the authorities, removed from their posts, and lose their credentials). That said I'm not ready to throw the baby out with the bathwater. You wouldn't necessarily blackball our entire canadian school system (or kid's sports, or boy scouts, etc) because a minority of teachers are crooks. Instead you fix the system, preventing future incidents, and dealing severely with offenders. Jesus put it well in Mark 9:42, "Any one who causes one of these little ones (children) to stumble, it would be better for them to have a big millstone around their neck and be thrown into the sea." I have similar compassion for those who take advantage of innocent children. We also should not stand for institutional bigotry or oppression of any sort.

[rideforever]

I think you guys are confusing heritage and personal preferences.

Being Christian ISN'T heritage, it's personal preference. Being a Nazi is a political affiliation, and not part of your heritage. Some people choose to be Nazi or Christian, but their heritage is German or Italian, or East Indian. Gone are the days when being from England meant you're Catholic.

heritage is:

1. Property that is or can be inherited; an inheritance.
2. Something that is passed down from preceding generations; a tradition.
3. The status acquired by a person through birth; a birthright:

I think personal preference can become heritage... something that is passed down from preceding generations.


I'll simplify it if my word choice confuses you too much ;) The oringinal arguement that spurred my post said we should like religion because people in the old days were religous. I said people in the old days were far from perfect, so we shouldn't do stuff just cause they used to do it. And then segwayed onto wondering if religions comonly have the view that whatever was done in the past is the right thing to do.

[grammafreddy]

Instead you fix the system, preventing future incidents, and dealing severely with offenders. Jesus put it well in Mark 9:42, "Any one who causes one of these little ones (children) to stumble, it would be better for them to have a big millstone around their neck and be thrown into the sea." I have similar compassion for those who take advantage of innocent children.

Yeah, I'd like to do the same. Drown the 'tards and they can't abuse children ever again! Good call!!! Not often we see a religious person here who thinks like that.