The new Australian Senate President Sue Lines - an atheist - said this week that she wanted the long-standing tradition of starting each sitting day with the Lord’s Prayer dumped because (insert drum roll here) of ‘diversity’.

‘On the one hand we’ve had almost every parliamentary leader applaud the diversity of the Parliament and so if we are genuine about the diversity of the Parliament we cannot continue to say a Christian prayer to open the day.’

There may well be a number of parliamentarians who do not believe in the Christian God, but there are even fewer parliamentarians who believe devoutly in the spiritual practice of burning leaves outside Parliament House. Why is one form of spirituality appropriate while the other is not?  Whatever you think of Christianity or Aboriginal Dreamtime, the new religion is Woke hypocrisy.

Can you imagine the uproar if Ms Lines had suggested the Welcome to Country or the smoking ceremony were divisive? And can you imagine the outrage if she added, for good measure, that because she was not Indigenous she should not have to endure them?

She would be derided as a racist and denounced by everybody.

But when she suggested the Lord’s Prayer was divisive and that because she was an atheist she should not have to endure it, everybody nodded approvingly and mumbled, ‘She’s got a point. If we don’t ditch the Christian prayer where will the diversity be?’

Abandoning the Lord’s Prayer does not create diversity, and it is certainly not enlightened. Rather, it pretends that our Westminster system of government and common law arose out of nowhere when, in fact, it was largely influenced by the Bible and Christian tradition.

https://www.spectator.com.au/2022/08/diversity-or-hypocrisy/

About time that bit of humbug got removed. Sex tourists, rapers of staffers, corrupt arseholes—cover from the Lords Prayer?

Mum’s funeral I had one prayer read—Hail Mary. No Lords prayers.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 3^rd, 2022 at 9:33pm:

About time that bit of humbug got removed. Sex tourists, rapers of staffers, corrupt arseholes—cover from the Lords Prayer? Mum’s funeral I had one prayer read—Hail Mary. No Lords prayers.

This is not the "what would Socks do on my filthy carpet in a sad abandoned house" thread, juvenile mong. Tsk, tsk  ::) ::)

It is about time that MPs stop pretending to be virtuous toilers in the public weal.

Christianity is a minor religion these days, all religion is for that matter.

Of course a "prayer" referring to and kowtowing to a mythical, non-existent
supernatural entity should be abolished from a 21st century Parliament.

It's embarrassing and an insult to the intelligence of the population, and
defies the necessity for the separation of church and state.  At least now
atheist politicians can remain outside the chamber until it's over—when the
doors are reopened and they can enter. 

And their eardrums are not assaulted with arrant bullshit.     >:(

Frank wrote on Aug 3^rd, 2022 at 6:22pm:

The new Australian Senate President Sue Lines - an atheist - said this week that she wanted the long-standing tradition of starting each sitting day with the Lord’s Prayer dumped because (insert drum roll here) of ‘diversity’.

it should have been scrapped years ago

AusGeoff wrote on Aug 6^th, 2022 at 9:08am:

Of course a "prayer" referring to and kowtowing to a mythical, non-existent supernatural entity should be abolished from a 21st century Parliament. It's embarrassing and an insult to the intelligence of the population, and defies the necessity for the separation of church and state.  At least now atheist politicians can remain outside the chamber until it's over—when the doors are reopened and they can enter.  And their eardrums are not assaulted with arrant bullshit.     >:(

Don't ignore the other side of the coun:



There may well be a number of parliamentarians who do not believe in the Christian God, but there are even fewer parliamentarians who believe devoutly in the spiritual practice of burning leaves outside Parliament House. Why is one form of spirituality appropriate while the other is not?  Whatever you think of Christianity or Aboriginal Dreamtime, the new religion is Woke hypocrisy.

Can you imagine the uproar if Ms Lines had suggested the Welcome to Country or the smoking ceremony were divisive? And can you imagine the outrage if she added, for good measure, that because she was not Indigenous she should not have to endure them?

She would be derided as a racist and denounced by everybody.

spirituality and religion aren't the same thing

John Smith wrote on Aug 6^th, 2022 at 10:45am:

spirituality and religion aren't the same thing

:D   :D

What IS the spiritual/religious difference between the two rituals, Christian prayer and.... er..... Aboriginal prayer by smoking ceremony? Both are about the spirit world and communication with it.

Frank wrote on Aug 6^th, 2022 at 1:32pm:

What IS the spiritual/religious difference between the two rituals,

i didn't say whether there was or wasn't a difference.

The fact  remains that religion and spirituality aren't the same thing and only a moron would argue that they were.

John Smith wrote on Aug 6^th, 2022 at 1:44pm:

Frank wrote on Aug 6th, 2022 at 1:32pm: What IS the spiritual/religious difference between the two rituals, i didn't say whether there was or wasn't a difference. The fact  remains that religion and spirituality aren't the same thing and only a moron would argue that they were.

So why get rid of the prayer but not the smoking ceremony?

That was the question from the OP. Dont avoid it.

Frank wrote on Aug 6^th, 2022 at 1:57pm:

John Smith wrote on Aug 6th, 2022 at 1:44pm: Frank wrote on Aug 6th, 2022 at 1:32pm: What IS the spiritual/religious difference between the two rituals, i didn't say whether there was or wasn't a difference. The fact  remains that religion and spirituality aren't the same thing and only a moron would argue that they were. So why get rid of the prayer but not the smoking ceremony? That was the question from the OP. Dont avoid it.

Franky-boi you are the biggest racist here.

Is the NZ Haka religious?

That's what the Smoking Ceremony is, a welcome to country.

The Lord's Prayer has to go.  It represents a church with a culture of pedophilia. 

https://c.tenor.com/mSKadVkkyesAAAAC/fishing-funny.gif

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 5^th, 2022 at 11:01pm:

It is about time that MPs stop pretending to be virtuous toilers in the public weal. Christianity is a minor religion these days, all religion is for that matter.

https://img.buzzfeed.com/buzzfeed-static/static/2019-05/17/2/campaign_images/buzzfeed-prod-web-03/a-rugby-player-has-been-sacked-over-an-instagram--2-27428-1558073451-0_dblbig.jpg

Frank wrote on Aug 6^th, 2022 at 1:57pm:

John Smith wrote on Aug 6th, 2022 at 1:44pm: Frank wrote on Aug 6th, 2022 at 1:32pm: What IS the spiritual/religious difference between the two rituals, i didn't say whether there was or wasn't a difference. The fact  remains that religion and spirituality aren't the same thing and only a moron would argue that they were. So why get rid of the prayer but not the smoking ceremony? That was the question from the OP. Dont avoid it.

why are you arguing that religion and spirituality are the same Sore end?

Seriously, ask for your refund

John Smith wrote on Aug 6^th, 2022 at 5:43pm:

Frank wrote on Aug 6th, 2022 at 1:57pm: John Smith wrote on Aug 6th, 2022 at 1:44pm: Frank wrote on Aug 6th, 2022 at 1:32pm: What IS the spiritual/religious difference between the two rituals, i didn't say whether there was or wasn't a difference. The fact  remains that religion and spirituality aren't the same thing and only a moron would argue that they were. So why get rid of the prayer but not the smoking ceremony? That was the question from the OP. Dont avoid it. why are you arguing that religion and spirituality are the same Sore end? Seriously, ask for your refund

You are trying to hide your stupidity without any success, as usual, plankers.  In this example there is ZERO difference between prayer and prayer (which is what smoking ceremonies are).  You are stupid enough to think that only monotheism is a religion but animalistic, polytheism isn't.

Aboriginal religion, like other religions, is characterised by having a god or gods who created people and the surrounding environment during a particular creation period at the beginning of time. Aboriginal people are very religious and spiritual, but rather than praying to a single god they cannot see, each group generally believes in a number of different deities, whose image is often depicted in some tangible, recognisable form. This form may be that of a particular landscape feature, an image in a rock art shelter, or in a plant or animal form.
https://www.aboriginalculture.com.au/aboriginal-religion/

Frank wrote on Aug 6^th, 2022 at 5:51pm:

which is what smoking ceremonies are

no they're not

Frank wrote on Aug 3^rd, 2022 at 6:22pm:

The new Australian Senate President Sue Lines - an atheist - said this week that she wanted the long-standing tradition of starting each sitting day with the Lord’s Prayer dumped because (insert drum roll here) of ‘diversity’........ https://www.spectator.com.au/2022/08/diversity-or-hypocrisy/

IMO,
JUDEO-CHRISTIAN [BIBLICAL] ETHICS BUILT AUSTRALIA,     ...and, 'built' the [FADING!!] social stability of all of the nations of the '1st world'.

The implementation of the Judeo-Christian principles wasn't, hasn't been perfect.

But in many of the nations of the 1st world, we see that the stability and peace which Judeo-Christian [biblical] ethics produced,
also promoted     the principle,     of freedom of the individual, and promoted free thinking, innovation, and social and mercantile prosperity - and peace.


Today, [it seems to some of us, that] every person in the world wants a 'share' [their share!] of the prosperity which Judeo-Christian [biblical] ethics has produced - within the nations of the 1st world.
[....hence we see so many persons seeking to escape their own cultural backgrounds [often producing poverty and oppression], and wanting to emigrate to the nations of the 1st world,
....and yet, we see NOT many, seeking to emigrate to places like North Korea.    Why is that ?
Why don't many people from the 3rd world, want to emigrate into North Korea, or Venezuela, or South Africa, or Zimbabwe ?
Why is that ? ]



BUT, IT IS ALL CHANGING.....
Today, many citizens of the nations of the 1st world are, en-masse, choosing to abandon the Judeo-Christian ethics and Judeo-Christian principles.

Why so ?

For my part, i am of the opinion, that almost every nation of the 1st world, is racing, and trying to morph into a 3rd world nation.  !!

Am i mistaken ?


.


Isaiah 29:13
Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:
14  Therefore, behold, I will proceed to do a marvellous work among this people, even a marvellous work and a wonder: for the wisdom of their wise men shall perish, and the understanding of their prudent men shall be hid.
15  Woe unto them that seek deep to hide their counsel from the LORD, and their works are in the dark, and they say, Who seeth us? and who knoweth us?



Q.
Why are our nations being destroyed, in front of our eyes ?


Isaiah 1:7
Your country is desolate, your cities are burned with fire: your land, strangers devour it in your presence, and it is desolate, as overthrown by strangers.


A.
Because we, our nations, have largely abandoned ethics, and integrity, and [truth and] judgement, in our society.

Frank wrote on Aug 6^th, 2022 at 10:43am:

: ...There may well be a number of parliamentarians who do not believe in the Christian God, but there are even fewer parliamentarians who believe devoutly in the spiritual practice of burning leaves outside Parliament House. Why is one form of spirituality appropriate while the other is not?

Traditional Aboriginal  smoking ceremonies and the ubiquitous Lord's
Prayer have nothing in common. The first is religious, and the latter
is spiritual.

The smoking ceremony is nowadays largely symbolic, used positively
as a "welcome to country".  Aboriginal mobs would light the fires as
an advisory to other mobs that they were approaching their territory,
and the resident mob would light a fire as a response—or, welcome
them to their country.

On the other hand, Christianity and its adherents have historically and
rabidly used the potentiality of punishment for purported "sinners" from
a mythical, supernatural entity to coerce and control other people, often
with threats of physical violence and ostracisation from the community.

Although its tenets were cobbled together a couple of millennia ago by
ill-educated desert nomads, Christianity still insidiously permeates our
largely secular society to this day.

At any rate, we don't have, and wouldn't allow smoking ceremonies in
the parliamentary chambers anyway.  The smoking ceremony is carried
out on the exterior steps of Parliament House, and people can attend or
avoid as they choose.  Which is not the case with the Lord's Prayer.

Frank wrote on Aug 6^th, 2022 at 5:51pm:

You are trying to hide your stupidity without any success, as usual, plankers.  In this example there is ZERO difference between prayer and prayer (which is what smoking ceremonies are).  You are stupid enough to think that only monotheism is a religion but animalistic, polytheism isn't...

Nope.  Aboriginal smoking ceremonies have nothing to do with prayer per se.
I's simply acknowledging a welcome to country, a common practice amongst
different Aboriginal mobs for thousands of years.


As an aside, can I ask you, in particular, why you include so many offensive
insults in your responses here?    Rather than diminishing your opponents'
arguments, it just makes your own arguments look a lot weaker.

BTW, the argumentum ad hominem fallacy is the last resort of those lacking
intellectual discourse.

AusGeoff wrote on Aug 7^th, 2022 at 12:10am:

Frank wrote on Aug 6th, 2022 at 10:43am: : ...There may well be a number of parliamentarians who do not believe in the Christian God, but there are even fewer parliamentarians who believe devoutly in the spiritual practice of burning leaves outside Parliament House. Why is one form of spirituality appropriate while the other is not?  Traditional Aboriginal smoking ceremonies and the ubiquitous Lord's Prayer have nothing in common. The first is religious, and the latter is spiritual.

'Traditional Aboriginal smoking ceremonies, .....are spiritual.'


John 4:24
God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.



'God is a Spirit', and, so are all of the demons who inhabit this world [with us], including their leader/master SATAN/Lucifer.

Bob Dylan said it, '.....you're gonna have to serve somebody, yes indeed You're gonna have to serve somebody....'

Whom are you going to worship/serve ?


Joshua 24:15
And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.
16  And the people answered and said, God forbid that we should forsake the LORD, to serve other gods;
17  For the LORD our God, he it is that brought us up and our fathers out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage, and which did those great signs in our sight, and preserved us in all the way wherein we went, and among all the people through whom we passed:


Our existence here [imo], is a test, about what type of master we would [freely] choose to follow.

And God said as much, to the children of Israel.....


Deuteronomy 8:2
And thou shalt remember all the way which the LORD thy God led thee these forty years in the wilderness, to humble thee, and to prove thee, to know what was in thine heart, whether thou wouldest keep his commandments, or no.

AusGeoff wrote on Aug 7^th, 2022 at 12:10am:

Frank wrote on Aug 6th, 2022 at 10:43am: : ...There may well be a number of parliamentarians who do not believe in the Christian God, but there are even fewer parliamentarians who believe devoutly in the spiritual practice of burning leaves outside Parliament House. Why is one form of spirituality appropriate while the other is not?  Traditional Aboriginal  smoking ceremonies and the ubiquitous Lord's Prayer have nothing in common. The first is religious, and the latter is spiritual. The smoking ceremony is nowadays largely symbolic, used positively as a "welcome to country".  Aboriginal mobs would light the fires as an advisory to other mobs that they were approaching their territory, and the resident mob would light a fire as a response—or, welcome them to their country. On the other hand, Christianity and its adherents have historically and rabidly used the potentiality of punishment for purported "sinners" from a mythical, supernatural entity to coerce and control other people, often with threats of physical violence and ostracisation from the community. Although its tenets were cobbled together a couple of millennia ago by ill-educated desert nomads, Christianity still insidiously permeates our largely secular society to this day. At any rate, we don't have, and wouldn't allow smoking ceremonies in the parliamentary chambers anyway.  The smoking ceremony is carried out on the exterior steps of Parliament House, and people can attend or avoid as they choose.  Which is not the case with the Lord's Prayer.

Nonsense.

I do notice- as you obviously do not - that you restrict yourself to a sympathetic  interpretation of a particular Aboriginal religious ritual regardless of its vast and old religious context and edifice of beliefs, rituals and dogmas but when turning to the Lord's prayer you immediately and reflexively denounce the entire religion and its history rather than, evenhandedly, restricting yourself to the particular ritual of the prayer now.  This ireflexive switch is so obvious  (except to you) as to be amusing.


The smoking ceremony IS about communicating with the teeming Aboriginal spirit world and as with every religious ritual, it has its own proper way of performing it, its words and initiates, who can and cannot perform it and the beliefs about how it communicates with spirits and what would happen if the spirits were disrespected.

Do YOU believe in Aboriginal spirits and how they relate to the living and the dead? Do you share the Aboriginal belief in communicating with spirits?

To say that Christianity has no deep spiritual dimensions but is a mererabid, oppresive religion while Aboriginal spirituality is all cuddly, fluffy spirituality and no religion, tradition and ritual is such nonsense that those who insist on such a grotesque evil/good juxtaposition must be either lying knowingly or be amazingly stupid and ignorant. 


Many Aborigines are also Christian's. In fact the 1967 referendum push, like the civil rights movement at the same time in the US, was animated largely by Aboriginal Christian leaders on Christian grounds.
https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/religionandethicsreport/spirituality-and-a-voice-for-indigenous-people-in-constitution/13998344

AusGeoff wrote on Aug 7^th, 2022 at 12:10am:

....... The smoking ceremony is nowadays largely symbolic, used positively as a "welcome to country".  Aboriginal mobs would light the fires as an advisory to other mobs that they were approaching their territory, and the resident mob would light a fire as a response—or, welcome them to their country. On the other hand, Christianity and its adherents have historically and rabidly used the potentiality of punishment for purported "sinners" from a mythical, supernatural entity to coerce and control other people, often with threats of physical violence and ostracisation from the community. Although its tenets were cobbled together a couple of millennia ago by ill-educated desert nomads, Christianity still insidiously permeates our largely secular society to this day.

Q.
Have they ?


AusGeoff,

You seem to be implying that it is a terrible and onerous thing, to ask individuals, who wish to live in a society of men and women, to also live according to a set of fair rules [i.e. one set of rules, which apply equally to all individuals]
....and, if you discover, that those specific laws/rules, were adopted, specifically, from Judeo-Christian [biblical] ethics/rules ?

Surely, it doesn't matter where the ethics/rules come from, as much as do those ethics/rules tend to produce peace and order, in a society of men and women ?


QUESTION;
Is it a terrible thing, to institute a list of laws among/within a community of people, so as to try to curb, strife, theft and murder among them ?
...and then is it reasonable to then claim that it is cruel to institute an agreed punishment, against those individuals who transgress the agreed community laws [i.e. laws which are agreed to, by the majority of a community] ?


e.g.
6 of the Ten Commandments from the bible......
Honor your Godly parents.            [is it unreasonable, to ask the young to respect the old ? ]
Don't kill.                                          [is it unreasonable, to ask persons to NOT murder others ? ]
Don't commit adultery.                  [is it unreasonable, to ask persons to NOT fornicate among themselves, in the manner, that wild beasts do ? ]
Don't steal.                                    [is it unreasonable, to ask persons to NOT take the property of other persons ? ]
Don't tell porkies, or speak false testimony against your neighbor.            [is it unreasonable, to ask persons to NOT blatantly lie to/and against others ? ]
Don't covet what belongs to others.                        [is it unreasonable, to ask persons to NOT covet what others posses ? ]

covet = = yearn to possess (something belonging to someone else).


1 John 5:2
By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments.
3  For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.


grievous = = (of something bad) very severe or serious.


Or is it your opinion, that those Judeo-Christian [biblical] ethics/commandments ARE [and would be] grievous to many of us - because they were adopted specifically, from Judeo-Christian [biblical] ethics/rules ?

Frank wrote on Aug 6^th, 2022 at 5:51pm:

You are stupid enough to think that only monotheism is a religion but animalistic, polytheism isn't.

Another example of an anachronistic pre-literate culture chafing against a 'modern' literate culture.

Urgent need for public education to assist transition  beyond the spiritual/religious manifestations of the past, to a new common spirituality for all human beings.

Starting with the Golden Rule perhaps, to replace article 18 of the UN UDHR (the "religious freedom" clause).

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 7^th, 2022 at 8:05pm:

Frank wrote on Aug 6th, 2022 at 5:51pm: You are stupid enough to think that only monotheism is a religion but animalistic, polytheism isn't. Another example of an anachronistic pre-literate culture chafing against a 'modern' literate culture. Urgent need for public education to assist transition  beyond the spiritual/religious manifestations of the past, to a new common spirituality for all human beings. Starting with the Golden Rule perhaps, to replace article 18 of the UN UDHR (the "religious freedom" clause).

https://c.tenor.com/9gHGn-aVPIoAAAAC/hey-bugger-off-bugger-off.gif

AusGeoff wrote on Aug 7^th, 2022 at 12:26am:

Frank wrote on Aug 6th, 2022 at 5:51pm: You are trying to hide your stupidity without any success, as usual, plankers.  In this example there is ZERO difference between prayer and prayer (which is what smoking ceremonies are).  You are stupid enough to think that only monotheism is a religion but animalistic, polytheism isn't... Nope.  Aboriginal smoking ceremonies have nothing to do with prayer per se. I's simply acknowledging a welcome to country, a common practice amongst different Aboriginal mobs for thousands of years. As an aside, can I ask you, in particular, why you include so many offensive insults in your responses here?    Rather than diminishing your opponents' arguments, it just makes your own arguments look a lot weaker. BTW, the argumentum ad hominem fallacy is the last resort of those lacking intellectual discourse.

I don't suffer fools gladly.
Anyone who says the above is a tendentious fool talking crap. You just appropriated tens of thousands of years worth of looking at the world and reduced it some glib, ignorant modern day political purpose. You understand absolutely nothing about Aboriginal religions or Christianity beyond what pops up in Wiki. You couldn't be more arrogantly ignorant if you tried.   And you are not alone, God help us.
As for intellectual discourse - don't  kid yourself, Geoff. Pitting what comes up on Wiki, coupled with severe, blinkered antipathy  based on nothing better than mundane daily political irritation (carefully nursed and tended to), is not 'intellectual disourse'. 

So no, I am not here to accommodate arrogant ignorance, others can do that.

for the Old People, making a living and obtaining materials for artefacts were inseparable from their commitment to a spiritual understanding of the origin of species, to conservative values in relation to change and to a cosmology in which economics had to be in conformity to ancestral authority”. They lived, in other words, in what philosopher Charles Taylor has described as a “world brimming with pres­ences”, in which the spiritual and the temporal, the natural and the supernatural, were fused within a cosmic order that was not to be manipulated and transformed — as it was in the West — but revered and maintained.

What we would now call faith was not a distinct sphere of life; it was inseparable from life itself, there forever, from the Dreaming, whose latent powers, including for the cyclical regrowth of plants and animals, were to be preserved through obedience to its demands. And where technologies — such as their Melanesian neighbours’ agricultural and horticultural methods — had not been sanctioned by the Dreaming, they rejected them, not out of ignorance but out of respect for the transcendent foundations of earthly existence.

In contrast, Pascoe’s caricature – which “consistently pushes the evidence of Aboriginal subsistence beyond what it can factually bear and into a European model of economic life … as if the more European the Old People can be made to seem, the better” – robbed that world of its spirituality. That certainly made Dark Emu all the more attractive to the staunchly secular “progressives”, who are its fiercest defenders; but it also made Pascoe incapable of understanding, much less explaining, the Indigenous world’s stability and persistence.

Ultimately, it condemned his book to being little more than “a popularised mythology of history” that “does not respect or do justice to” the societies it purports to admire.

Frank wrote on Aug 7^th, 2022 at 12:57pm:

AusGeoff wrote on Aug 7th, 2022 at 12:10am: Traditional Aboriginal  smoking ceremonies and the ubiquitous Lord's Prayer have nothing in common. The first is religious, and the latter is spiritual... Nonsense. I do notice- as you obviously do not - that you restrict yourself to a sympathetic  interpretation of a particular Aboriginal religious ritual regardless of its vast and old religious context and edifice of beliefs, rituals and dogmas but when turning to the Lord's prayer you immediately and reflexively denounce the entire religion and its history rather than, evenhandedly, restricting yourself to the particular ritual of the prayer now.  This ireflexive switch is so obvious  (except to you) as to be amusing. The smoking ceremony IS about communicating with the teeming Aboriginal spirit world and as with every religious ritual, it has its own proper way of performing it, its words and initiates, who can and cannot perform it and the beliefs about how it communicates with spirits and what would happen if the spirits were disrespected...

From ReachOut Australia:

Spirituality is something that’s talked about a lot but is often misunderstood.
Many people think that spirituality and religion are the same thing, and so they
bring their beliefs and prejudices about religion to discussions about spirituality.
Though all religions emphasise spiritualism as being part of faith, you can be
"spiritual" without being religious or a member of an organised religion.

Religion: This is a specific set of organised beliefs and practices, usually shared
by a community or group.

Spirituality: This is more of an individual practice, and has to do with having a
sense of peace and purpose. It also relates to the process of developing beliefs
around the meaning of life and connection with others, without any set spiritual
values.

Frank wrote on Aug 6^th, 2022 at 5:51pm:

AusGeoff wrote on Aug 7th, 2022 at 12:26am: As an aside, can I ask you, in particular, why you include so many offensive insults in your responses here? I don't suffer fools gladly. Anyone who says the above is a tendentious fool talking crap. You just appropriated tens of thousands of years worth of looking at the world and reduced it some glib, ignorant modern day political purpose. You understand absolutely nothing about Aboriginal religions or Christianity beyond what pops up in Wiki. You couldn't be more arrogantly ignorant if you tried.   And you are not alone, God help us. As for intellectual discourse - don't  kid yourself, Geoff. Pitting what comes up on Wiki, coupled with severe, blinkered antipathy  based on nothing better than mundane daily political irritation (carefully nursed and tended to), is not 'intellectual discourse'. So no, I am not here to accommodate arrogant ignorance, others can do that...

Wow!  Frank, why don't you open up and tell me what you really think? 

And I'm guessing this means we're never gonna be able to get a room together?     ;D

 

AusGeoff wrote on Aug 8^th, 2022 at 3:55am:

Frank wrote on Aug 7th, 2022 at 12:57pm: AusGeoff wrote on Aug 7th, 2022 at 12:10am: Traditional Aboriginal  smoking ceremonies and the ubiquitous Lord's Prayer have nothing in common. The first is religious, and the latter is spiritual... Nonsense. I do notice- as you obviously do not - that you restrict yourself to a sympathetic  interpretation of a particular Aboriginal religious ritual regardless of its vast and old religious context and edifice of beliefs, rituals and dogmas but when turning to the Lord's prayer you immediately and reflexively denounce the entire religion and its history rather than, evenhandedly, restricting yourself to the particular ritual of the prayer now.  This ireflexive switch is so obvious  (except to you) as to be amusing. The smoking ceremony IS about communicating with the teeming Aboriginal spirit world and as with every religious ritual, it has its own proper way of performing it, its words and initiates, who can and cannot perform it and the beliefs about how it communicates with spirits and what would happen if the spirits were disrespected... From ReachOut Australia: Spirituality is something that’s talked about a lot but is often misunderstood. Many people think that spirituality and religion are the same thing, and so they bring their beliefs and prejudices about religion to discussions about spirituality. Though all religions emphasise spiritualism as being part of faith, you can be "spiritual" without being religious or a member of an organised religion. Religion: This is a specific set of organised beliefs and practices, usually shared by a community or group. Spirituality: This is more of an individual practice, and has to do with having a sense of peace and purpose. It also relates to the process of developing beliefs around the meaning of life and connection with others, without any set spiritual values.

That definition of spirituality simply could not be applied to Aboriginal beliefs, only to an individual Western way of looking at the world, having left a church or temple or mosque behind.

But Aboriginal religion is NOT just individual, California-style 'whatever is your bag, man'  spirituality, developed on an 'individual spiritual journey and growth' ( :D) but something unchanging over thousands of years, handed on from generation to generation; beliefs, rituals, mythology and spiritual pantheon of that binds the dead, the living and yet to be born together. That is what religion means: religare is Latin for re-binding. And that timeless inter--generational binding is certainly very strongly present in Aboriginal religion, EVEN more strongly than in Western religious traditions. The latter has a lot more room for individual interpretation, fracturing, re-interpretation and exegesis - in short  'individuated spirituality' -  than Aboriginal religion which has none.

So, in fact, you can be spiritual within all the various West religious traditions but not as an Aborigine who adheres to Aboriginal religion.

Frank wrote on Aug 3^rd, 2022 at 6:22pm:

The new Australian Senate President Sue Lines - an atheist - said this week that she wanted the long-standing tradition of starting each sitting day with the Lord’s Prayer dumped because (insert drum roll here) of ‘diversity’. ‘On the one hand we’ve had almost every parliamentary leader applaud the diversity of the Parliament and so if we are genuine about the diversity of the Parliament we cannot continue to say a Christian prayer to open the day.’ There may well be a number of parliamentarians who do not believe in the Christian God, but there are even fewer parliamentarians who believe devoutly in the spiritual practice of burning leaves outside Parliament House. Why is one form of spirituality appropriate while the other is not?  Whatever you think of Christianity or Aboriginal Dreamtime, the new religion is Woke hypocrisy. Can you imagine the uproar if Ms Lines had suggested the Welcome to Country or the smoking ceremony were divisive? And can you imagine the outrage if she added, for good measure, that because she was not Indigenous she should not have to endure them? She would be derided as a racist and denounced by everybody. But when she suggested the Lord’s Prayer was divisive and that because she was an atheist she should not have to endure it, everybody nodded approvingly and mumbled, ‘She’s got a point. If we don’t ditch the Christian prayer where will the diversity be?’ Abandoning the Lord’s Prayer does not create diversity, and it is certainly not enlightened. Rather, it pretends that our Westminster system of government and common law arose out of nowhere when, in fact, it was largely influenced by the Bible and Christian tradition. https://www.spectator.com.au/2022/08/diversity-or-hypocrisy/

I am not a God freak, an Atheist, nor an Agnostic, yet I completely agree with this OP, because it is a logical, and reasonable opinion. For this point of view, I am sure I will be insulted by one of the above three.

Frank wrote on Aug 7^th, 2022 at 10:06pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 7th, 2022 at 8:05pm: Frank wrote on Aug 6th, 2022 at 5:51pm: You are stupid enough to think that only monotheism is a religion but animalistic, polytheism isn't. Another example of an anachronistic pre-literate culture chafing against a 'modern' literate culture. Urgent need for public education to assist transition  beyond the spiritual/religious manifestations of the past, to a new common spirituality for all human beings. Starting with the Golden Rule perhaps, to replace article 18 of the UN UDHR (the "religious freedom" clause). https://c.tenor.com/9gHGn-aVPIoAAAAC/hey-bugger-off-bugger-off.gif

Er frank..that's not deba...oh, never mind.

You don't think its possible for all humans to eventually achieve a new awareness of 'common spirituality'?

The mumbo jumbo at the altar is often (but not always) as annoying as an anachronistic smoke ceremony (which nevertheless might be engaging at times)....

Atheists are Anti-Religious people.
...but they still don't know what they're 'Pro-' about?

Why would you want to make this into an issue?  What other people believe is their business. You may disagree with them, but why disrespect them to the extent of denigrating them?

You consider yourself an Atheist? Fine.  Religion is not part of your life? No problem. Try posting about things that are part of your life instead.

In my experience, very few people who self identify as atheists are anti-religion.

These online forums are a focal point for extremists.

The Lord's Prayer, aboriginal smoking ceremonies - They have a lot in common. They both have cultural aspects. In both cases, show some respect.

Most 'Atheists' are very 'Anti' Religious - it's the foundation of their existence to be anti-religious.

What they are 'pro' about is still a mystery. But recent times have seen them wearing black skivvies, drinking cafe-lattes, dabbling in Science (you know, where Astronomers and NASA physicists are now interpreting the universe in a very 'religious' way), part of the Media and supporters of ANTI-normal sexualities.

Atheists are typically anti-Christian first and last. Or anti Judeo-Christian, to be precise.  They tend to be very solicitous towards other religions, especially the ones that are also hostile to Judeo-Christianity, like Islam, Aboriginal religions and all the religions Judeo-Christianity has come into contact with.

They would never argue with an Aborigine that his beliefs in their various sun, moon and creator gods and creation stories are daft superstitions and that they should leave all that mumbo-jumbo behind and lead empirical, positivist, science- centred lives. 

Frank wrote on Aug 29^th, 2022 at 11:15am:

Atheists are typically anti-Christian first and last. Or anti Judeo-Christian, to be precise.  They tend to be very solicitous towards other religions, especially the ones that are also hostile to Judeo-Christianity, like Islam, Aboriginal religions and all the religions Judeo-Christianity has come into contact with. They would never argue with an Aborigine that his beliefs in their various sun, moon and creator gods and creation stories are daft superstitions and that they should leave all that mumbo-jumbo behind and lead empirical, positivist, science- centred lives.

Hear hear: let's open Ayers Rock again....

And all the temples, synagogues, churches and mosques to anyone who wants to visit them...

Aboriginal superstitions

https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/19895022

Jasin wrote on Aug 29^th, 2022 at 9:44am:

Most 'Atheists' are very 'Anti' Religious - it's the foundation of their existence to be anti-religious. What they are 'pro' about is still a mystery. But recent times have seen them wearing black skivvies, drinking cafe-lattes, dabbling in Science (you know, where Astronomers and NASA physicists are now interpreting the universe in a very 'religious' way), part of the Media and supporters of ANTI-normal sexualities.

Not in Australia. I haven't come across any evidence for that. There is very little motivation for being anti-religious in this country. In the Deep South of the USA, yes I can understand that.

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 29^th, 2022 at 11:51am:

Frank wrote on Aug 29th, 2022 at 11:15am: Atheists are typically anti-Christian first and last. Or anti Judeo-Christian, to be precise.  They tend to be very solicitous towards other religions, especially the ones that are also hostile to Judeo-Christianity, like Islam, Aboriginal religions and all the religions Judeo-Christianity has come into contact with. They would never argue with an Aborigine that his beliefs in their various sun, moon and creator gods and creation stories are daft superstitions and that they should leave all that mumbo-jumbo behind and lead empirical, positivist, science- centred lives.  Hear hear: let's open Ayers Rock again.... And all the temples, synagogues, churches and mosques to anyone who wants to visit them...

Good point. They have their restrictions in place too.
For 'fasionable' reasons of course.

John_Taverner wrote on Aug 29^th, 2022 at 10:31pm:

Jasin wrote on Aug 29th, 2022 at 9:44am: Most 'Atheists' are very 'Anti' Religious - it's the foundation of their existence to be anti-religious. What they are 'pro' about is still a mystery. But recent times have seen them wearing black skivvies, drinking cafe-lattes, dabbling in Science (you know, where Astronomers and NASA physicists are now interpreting the universe in a very 'religious' way), part of the Media and supporters of ANTI-normal sexualities. Not in Australia. I haven't come across any evidence for that. There is very little motivation for being anti-religious in this country. In the Deep South of the USA, yes I can understand that.

Go for a walk through 'Inner City' and you'll find heaps.

Jasin wrote on Aug 30^th, 2022 at 6:16am:

John_Taverner wrote on Aug 29th, 2022 at 10:31pm: Jasin wrote on Aug 29th, 2022 at 9:44am: Most 'Atheists' are very 'Anti' Religious - it's the foundation of their existence to be anti-religious. What they are 'pro' about is still a mystery. But recent times have seen them wearing black skivvies, drinking cafe-lattes, dabbling in Science (you know, where Astronomers and NASA physicists are now interpreting the universe in a very 'religious' way), part of the Media and supporters of ANTI-normal sexualities. Not in Australia. I haven't come across any evidence for that. There is very little motivation for being anti-religious in this country. In the Deep South of the USA, yes I can understand that. Go for a walk through 'Inner City' and you'll find heaps.

Maybe. If you mean Sydney, my brief experience is that a lot of people are crass and ignorant in certain parts. I obviously walk in more polite circles because my experience is totally different.

However I know that forums like this are a refuge for some very disturbed individuals. I don't think they reflect everyday society.

You are right in that John T.
John_Taverner wrote on Aug 30^th, 2022 at 8:05am:

However I know that forums like this are a refuge for some very disturbed individuals. I don't think they reflect everyday society.

John_Taverner wrote on Aug 30^th, 2022 at 8:05am:

However I know that forums like this are a refuge for some very disturbed individuals. I don't think they reflect everyday society.

Not so. "Social disease".


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7TT4jnnWys

This Topic was moved here from Atheism by freediver.