Re:Legal definition of religion
« Reply #15 on: 2003-10-04 15:02:18 »
becasue that is not argumentation, that is capitulation arg. has been established and previously accepted there is no need to reinvent the wheel to be concommitant with the forum when the forum is incorrect.
religion is incohate with knowledge.
Darwins argument is that evolution is responsible for humanity. Not creation. And through the knowledge of the scientific method, further evidence has been established and accepted to continuously refute creationism et al. religion.
The term religionis a coy way of saying that you have a schema, a meme-plex, that is sacrosanct; that you have invested emotional and cognitive resources in asserting and you further assert that it is knowledge by the mere fiat of asserting it under the guise of 'religion'.
Fundementally it is a ego defense mechanism of denial.
Re:Legal definition of religion
« Reply #16 on: 2004-05-25 16:39:20 »
Back to the topic of ritual, the main obstacle to ritual in the Church of Virus is that it's an online community. I can't think of any religious ritual that doesn't involve the members physically getting together.
Recently I had a conversation with some Christians about whether it was possible for them to have a church entirely through the internet and yet remain technically consistent with their Christian bible. One of the main challenges was trying to figure out a way to administer participatory worship services, baptisms and the "lord's supper." Have a web conference call for the preaching and singing; conduct baptisms through a real-time web video broadcast; mail wine and crackers to the congregation in coffee-creamer-type containers and coordinate the eating of them through a chat room. Wine and crackers really are available for sale in coffee-creamer packaging, by the way!
Well, they listened to these ideas but said it just wouldn't be the same. I would tend to agree, but I wouldn't rule out ritual from real-time interactive internet media. This might be especially true if we established a virtual meeting room with movable avatars like this one: http://shipoffools.com/church/
Quote:
Welcome to Church of Fools, the UK's first web-based, 3D church, which opened as a three-month experiment on May 11th. Church of Fools is an attempt to create holy ground on the net, where people can worship, pray and talk about faith.
He believed in a door. The door was the way to... to... The Door was The Way. Good. Capital letters were always the best way of dealing with things you didn't have a good answer to.
Re:Legal definition of religion
« Reply #17 on: 2004-06-03 11:44:10 »
Quote:
2004-MAY: TX: Unitarian Congregation denied tax exempt status: Texas Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn has denied tax exempt status to a Unitarian Universalist congregation in Denison, TX. The Star-Telegram of Dallas states that the "...church isn't really a religious organization -- at least for tax purposes. Its reasoning: the organization 'does not have one system of belief'." Jesse Ancira, the comptroller's chief lawyer, said that the government has applied a consistent standard. For any organization to qualify as a religion, members must have "simply a belief in God, or gods, or a higher power. We have got to apply a test, and use some objective standards. We're not using the test to deny the exemptions for a particular group because we like them or don't like them." Apparently, another reason for denying tax exempt status is the lack of public meetings. The Comptroller denied certification for a New Age group and a Wiccan group because their services were closed to the public. It appears that the government is refusing to recognize religious groups which differ from the traditional pattern. They must have a single system of belief; they must teach that one or more deities exist; they must hold public services. Thus, Pagan, Atheist, Agnostic, Ethical Culture, Buddhist, Mormon, Unitarian Universalist, and similar organizations are not considered religious groups by the state.
Church officials believe that this is the first case in the U.S. where a Unitarian Universalist church has been denied tax exempt status because of its religious philosophy. Dan Althoff, church board president said: "I was surprised -- surprised and shocked -- because the Unitarian church in the United States has a very long history." He noted that father-and-son presidents John Adams and John Quincy Adams were both Unitarians. So was Thomas Jefferson. Other Unitarian Universalist congregations in the state are concerned that their tax exempt status may now be revoked at any time.
This is from religioustolerance.org news. I think it's BS but I also think it's relevant to the discussion. There goes tax exemption...
He believed in a door. The door was the way to... to... The Door was The Way. Good. Capital letters were always the best way of dealing with things you didn't have a good answer to.
Re:Legal definition of religion
« Reply #19 on: 2004-06-06 16:56:20 »
I'm a Unitarian and I live in Texas. When I saw this, I decided it was Strayhorn posturing for the religious right. It is basically known that she wishes to challenge Rick Perry for the Governorship in 2006, so she has to reassure the religious right that she knows who the proper enemies are. Just for an update, I believe I heard that this has already been more or less shot down. I think everybody knew this wasn't going anywhere. First of all it isn't true. Unitarians Universalists do have a historical set of beliefs which they acknowledge as their heritage. They just don't require that you actually believe them in order to belong to or work with the UU church.
Historically Unitariarians rejected the doctrine of the Trinity (the Nicene Creed), and originated in a part of eastern Eastern Europe then known as Transylvania in the 16th Century. Some of them found their way into the US and joined up with the Universalists, who were primarily known for their belief in Universal salvation -- everyone goes to heaven. The resulting denomination was so tolerant as to belief that it made a very attractive compromise for people in religiously mixed marriages who could find little peace in either community. Another common occurance in UU churces are a high number of Christian/Atheist marriages. As the religious right has grown in strength in the US, UU churches have generally picked up lots of gays, wiccans, and other people who feel ostracized by the dominance of right wing wackos in their various local communities. The largest Unitarian Universalist church in the world is in Tulsa Oklahoma - also home of Oral Roberts University and his enormous statue of a set of praying hands.
2004-MAY: TX: Unitarian Congregation denied tax exempt status: Texas Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn has denied tax exempt status to a Unitarian Universalist congregation in Denison, TX. The Star-Telegram of Dallas states that the "...church isn't really a religious organization -- at least for tax purposes. Its reasoning: the organization 'does not have one system of belief'." Jesse Ancira, the comptroller's chief lawyer, said that the government has applied a consistent standard. For any organization to qualify as a religion, members must have "simply a belief in God, or gods, or a higher power. We have got to apply a test, and use some objective standards. We're not using the test to deny the exemptions for a particular group because we like them or don't like them." Apparently, another reason for denying tax exempt status is the lack of public meetings. The Comptroller denied certification for a New Age group and a Wiccan group because their services were closed to the public. It appears that the government is refusing to recognize religious groups which differ from the traditional pattern. They must have a single system of belief; they must teach that one or more deities exist; they must hold public services. Thus, Pagan, Atheist, Agnostic, Ethical Culture, Buddhist, Mormon, Unitarian Universalist, and similar organizations are not considered religious groups by the state.
Church officials believe that this is the first case in the U.S. where a Unitarian Universalist church has been denied tax exempt status because of its religious philosophy. Dan Althoff, church board president said: "I was surprised -- surprised and shocked -- because the Unitarian church in the United States has a very long history." He noted that father-and-son presidents John Adams and John Quincy Adams were both Unitarians. So was Thomas Jefferson. Other Unitarian Universalist congregations in the state are concerned that their tax exempt status may now be revoked at any time.
This is from religioustolerance.org news. I think it's BS but I also think it's relevant to the discussion. There goes tax exemption...
by that definition, Church of Virus is certainly a religion, since it allows us to share our thoughts collectively.
this is certainly also the goal of zen and taoism.
That definition is problematic because if taken seriously it would categorize any special interest group (democrats, SF fans, Red Sox supporters) as a religion. Also I don't think it is obvious that sharing thoughts collectively is the goal of zen or taoism, though I would agree that those are examples of religions despite not falling under the modern dictionary definition.
To include the Abrahamic religions, Virus, zen buddhism, wicca all in one category while excluding political, sports and fiction special interest groups, I prefer to define religion as a memeplex whose purpose is to give meaning to the lives of its adherents.
Author
Logged
