Are all religions cults? OP actually started by Liz

[_Yoda]

My purpose in citing Wittgenstein is not to demand that definitions be dispensed with on his authority - board members can read his lucid and unpretentious phrasing and see if they agree with it without knowing anything about Wittgenstein's place in the history of philosophy. It is simply to say that it may not be essential to have a formal definition of a word before we can use it, and that this may perhaps apply to the word 'cult'.

Interesting thoughts, Chap!

I just find it intriguing that the word, "cult", has evolved into having such a negative connotation when the first definition of the word still pretty much describes most mainstream religions.

I guess, to Marg's point....and to others here who refrain from having any type of belief in a higher power...

Is incorporating your religion into an essential part of your culture, and the basis for the way you make decisions, and raise your children, mind control, and therefore, emotionally unhealthy?

Marg seems pretty adamant that this is the case. JAK has also posted similar views. So has Schmo.

Their views are far from identical to each other, but they have all strongly suggested that it is much more emotionally healthy for a person to "live for today" and not really focus on any type of afterlife existing, and rely more heavily on science, and what we actually now know.

I think that it is possible to balance between living in the "here and now", and also incorporating morals, etc. based on a religious belief.

Thoughts?

[_Yoda]

Hi, Marg!

I copy/pasted your comments from the Wayneman thread over here so it could be discussed here as well:

My comments about Marg partying were not meant to be catty. I was just teasing....much along the same lines as you saying "I wish I was going out, too."

Did you delete them? I didn't read anything catty.

I think I am actually beginning to understand Marg's perspective. She was drawn into studying about Mormonism from a friend of hers who was Mormon.

I only knew them on the Net, well actually I did end up meeting them in person one time.

Her own personal views have always been very strongly atheistic.

I didn't think of myself as an an atheist until participating on the Net in religious discussions. I would think of myself and still do as having a strong naturalistic view devoid of organized religious indoctrination.

It seems to me that her disagreement is really in any type of belief of higher power. She just doesn't see the logic or need for it.

No. My disagreement is in a number of things, but not in what you think "belief of a higher power".

I dislike the negative judgmental attitude religion seems to have influenced religious individuals to have against others who don't share their similar beliefs. When it comes to their attitude about atheism for example they often think atheists are morally deficient. That somehow having a God belief translates into having good moral values. I find that attitude is so pervasive with Mormons, based on my observations of discussions on the Net. I disagree with the indoctrination process employed by many religions which start from an early age. I disagree with lies perpetrated by religions, in Mormonism's case that the Book of Mormon is historical, that it is sacred, that somehow a supreme entity had its hand in its making. I don't agree with religious organizations getting involved politically, in getting involved with suppressing the scientific educational programs in schools. So those are some examples of what I take issue with, but having a belief in a supreme entity per se I have no negative thoughts of. It's the belief in a God which interferes with mankind and favors particular groups, and how that influences people's attitudes I might take issue with. Mormons are very much manipulated and controlled by their authority, believe in lies perpetrated by the Church, that sort of thing I take issue with.

I think that we could actually start a rather interesting discussion involving characteristics of cults an religions if everyone can be on board to be open about it, and not approach it in a condemning way.

I'll start a new thread, and carry over some of the cult discussion from this thread.

I'll take a look.

I'm going to type some responses to your comments here momentarily. I need to get my five year old a snack.
>
>
>
>
>

[_marg]

Non-believers also do things in a non-religious context that they believe will ensure their survival. Even though they might not see the outcome as eternal, we all tolerate things for example, in our professional lives that ensure our financial well being, allow us to put a roof over our heads, partake of health care (such as it is) and education.

What if we don't tow the party line at work? We risk losing our income and all the things our income supplies.

Do you think I LIKE the playdough stuck to the bottom of my shoes?

Sure non-believers may be involved with an organization which has cult like qualities. That organization may be employing techniques to get a cultural attitude which will encourage a group think attitude supportive of the goals of the organization.

I have no problem recognizing cults exist outside of religious organizations. The reason I used the word cult in the discussion as applied to Mormonism was because we were discussing Bishop's questioning of member's private sex lives (which I take issue with as I think they are employing thought reform techniques in order to manipulate and control)and obedience to church authority such that church authority dictates supercede the individual's own critical thinking on that dictate..as an example the Mormon garments. So although an individual may critically think wearing the underwear is ridiculous, or uncomfortable, or not what they would do on their own volition, they relinguish their own decision making over to the Church authority and are obedient. It seems like a small thing, ..underwear... but it's indicative of the mindset ..that group-think mentality and the authority given the Church such that it supercedes the individual's own critical thinking.

[_Yoda]

Did you delete them? I didn't read anything catty.

No, I just moved the comment to this thread. I just said that we would have to wait until you were through partying before we would be able to find out what your views are. How was your evening, by the way?

I dislike the negative judgmental attitude religion seems to have influenced religious individuals to have against others who don't share their similar beliefs. When it comes to their attitude about atheism for example they often think atheists are morally deficient. That somehow having a God belief translates into having good moral values. I find that attitude is so pervasive with Mormons, based on my observations of discussions on the Net.

Actually, we agree here. I also dislike the negative judgmental attitudes that some Mormons possess, and often call them on it. This was one of the things which bothered me about MAD. I think that we definitely need to be more accepting of others with different beliefs. And, no, I don't find atheists to be morally deficient in any way. Morality depends on each individual's character. Everyone is different. There are a lot of factors involved.

I'll comment more in a bit.

[_marg]

I don't think wearing garments is really that odd. I guess it's because I actually like how they feel on. I think if I left the Church, I would probably wear a camisole or something similar. I have Fibromyalgia, and the garments tend to keep me a little warmer, which is helpful.

I really don't find it any more odd than a Catholic wearing a cross or a rosary. All of these types of things are symbolic of faith.

I think if you were to question a group of individuals in our society whether or not wearing Church sanctioned underwear of the sort the Mormon Church has is odd, the majority of people would say it is. I think if asked if the cross or rosary is odd to wear as a necklace, most wouldn't find it that odd. I necklace is not nearly as intimate as underwear, and even the look of the Mormon garments is odd. Sure maybe a small percentage might view Mormon garments as something they might like to wear but I'm not convinced of that by yours and Harmony's take. I think it's your Mormon perspective and that you are attempting to rationalize the wearing of them. But even so, if someone wants or chooses to do something that is entirely different to someone being mentally coerced via manipulative thought reform techniques applied to the group they belong to. I don't see the purpose of the underwear as anything more than controlling the private lives of the individual and in getting them to be reminded of their loyalty and affiliation with the Church. But that's just one of their thought reform techniques. On it's own it seems like a small thing, but when one adds up all the techniques it seems very manipulative of the church.

[_marg]

No, I just moved the comment to this thread. I just said that we would have to wait until you were through partying before we would be able to find out what your views are. How was your evening, by the way?

I met and talked with an ex Mennonite. When she split with her first husband her family gave her a very hard time and the church excommunicated her.

My friend had one of her 3 yearly parties in which she hires a band and typically about 100 people show up.

by the way, I still can moderate threads, so that needs to be fixed.

[_Yoda]

I think it's your Mormon perspective and that you are attempting to rationalize the wearing of them. But even so, if someone wants or chooses to do something that is entirely different to someone being mentally coerced via manipulative thought reform techniques applied to the group they belong to. I don't see the purpose of the underwear as anything more than controlling the private lives of the individual and in getting them to be reminded of their loyalty and affiliation with the Church. But that's just one of their thought reform techniques. On it's own it seems like a small thing, but when one adds up all the techniques it seems very manipulative of the church.

Well, I suppose that I am coming at this from a "Mormon perspective", or, rather, my perspective as a Mormon. I'm not sure that's really a bad thing. It just is.

I'm not sure why you feel that Harmony or myself were manipulated. Harmony is a convert to the Church. She did not grow up in the Church. She made a conscious decision to be married in the temple, and participate in the ordinances there.

Although I grew up as a member of the Church, my father is a convert, and we always spoke very openly and positively about different religions and beliefs. I grew up in Northern California; a large majority of my friends were Catholic, Episcopalian, and Hindu. There was a rather large East Indian population, which provided the Hindu influence. We also had a huge Buddhist festival in town every year. There was a rather large segment of Chinese immigrants who settled near us as well. This gave me a multicultural view that most Utah Mormons don't experience.

I had taken temple classes, and knew what I was getting into when I married in the temple. It was a conscious choice.

As Harmony pointed out earlier, simply because someone complains about something doesn't mean it wasn't a conscious decision.

There are other aspects of the Church that I do find manipulative, but I will discuss those a little later.

I have to cut this conversation short for the moment. Dinner time.

[_Yoda]

by the way, I still can moderate threads, so that needs to be fixed.

PM Shades. It will have to be something he adjusts. I can't get into anyone else's profile.

[_Ray A]

I don't believe there will ever be an end to this argument about whether Mormonism is a cult. I've been on the Net nearly nine years and it hasn't been resolved. Some think it is, others don't (including some ex-Mormons). Samuel The Utanhite has been running a very long poll now, with the question: "Is Mormonism a cult?". Those voting no have always been ahead, and it currently stands at:

NO 55.4% 3066

YES 44.6% 2466

I would presume that Sam's site is heavily frequented mainly by ex-Mormons, so this poll has yielded some interesting results. You can vote in the poll Here.

I've always believed that Mormonism has "cultic strains", but I wouldn't say it's a cult. For some believers it does appear to engender some cult-like behaviour in them, but I ask, would people like Richard Poll, Eugene England, Sterling Mc Murrin, or even Ed Firmage (yes, he's still a member in spite of strong criticisms) have remained in a cult? Why did Ernest Hemmingway not condemn it as a cult?

The fact is that Mormonism has, and allows (sometimes admittedly grudgingly) "sub-cultures" to flourish apart from the "mainstream". The Dialoguers (with England as a co-founder), the Sunstoners, et.al, who see themselves as "loyal opposition". Cults don't usually tolerate this to any degree. I'm not aware of such sub-cultures in Scientology, or even the JWs. But, on the other hand, this is why I've possibly been one of the strongest online critics of the excommunication of Professor David Wright, because when the Church did that, it only added a few 100 barrells of fuel to the notion that it is a "cult". Its willingness to tolerate dissent from within, and dissenting views, is in a large measure a sort of standard as to how "cultish" it is. The excommunication of the "September Six" also proved, in my opinion, to be one of the biggest PR disasters the Church experienced in the latter half of the 20th century.

So the record is mixed. But if we continue to see "purges", and more and more hardline agendas, the "cult image" will stick. (The garment argument is really a silly one, in my opinion) It is also when something has a strong either/or character that it gravitates to cult-like, but even that isn't an iron-clad measure, and even non-religious organisations sometimes behave like this (witness my former posts on the explusion of Phillip Adams as patron of the Atheist Society of Australia).

[_JAK]

In discussions, definitions are implied and/or stated. A problem is understanding. If we want to understand one another, it’s important that we deal with the concepts people intend to express. Absent that, there is misunderstanding and often distortion.

Cult is clearly a term which carries different meanings as that same word appears in different contexts. This on-line dictionary offers a similar comprehensive definition as was previously stated in a post on this topic.

A question about use of any term is inherently: What did the user of the term intend?

It’s important to know that. For example, if a person intends ONLY definition number 8 on the above dictionary reference, the person using the term has some responsibility to make clear by extended language that was the intent. But as we can see, “cult” has broad application as a general term.

Too frequently in discussion, people use terms as well as context to spin meaning. The result is often a distortion, and soon people are in argument about what the writer said or intended.