2006-01-13 Reaction to Religion discussion

From HypertWiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Please pardon the formatting irregularities... (anyone got an automated IRC-to-wiki translator?)

Contents

Part 1: Vee opens a dialogue; Tene responds

10:21 * -!- Vee changed the topic of #religion to: discussion/ learning about religious topics and beliefs. All religions/beliefs welcome. Things said here are personal beliefs; each person is entitled to accept or reject what's offered.
10:23 <!Vee>: Just in case anyone is around.... Here's a good question  :) Are science and religion mutually exclusive? Can you believe both at the same time?
10:33 <!Tene>: to me, I don't quite understand how that could be a point of contention
10:34 <!Tene>: Kind of like asking if science and cooking are mutually exclusive
10:34 <!Tene>: all Science is is a way of looking at the world
10:35 <!Tene>: A method of understanding things and making sense of what you see and experience
10:36 <!Tene>: "Science" is no more specific to something like "particle physics" than cooking is to "chocolate truffles with chocolatey chocolate filling and a chocolate topping, but only the really tiny kind" or something
10:36 <!Tene>: "cooking" is "making sense of the food around you", in a way
10:37 <!Tene>: some people just let others do all the cooking and some people just let others do all the thinking
10:38 <!Tene>: but it's a method of thinking, and just like everyone can eat an apple, everyone can see cause and effect in everything, even religion
10:39 <!Tene>: You can say "I suspect that if I throw this ball in the air, it will come back down."
10:39 <!Tene>: That's scientific thinking.
10:39 <!Tene>: If you say "I believe that if I follow the teachings of this religion, my life will be better", that's also scientific thinking.
10:40 <!Tene>: You're making a hypothesis about the world and then you test it, whether by throwing things in the air or by living your life according to the teachings of a particular religion.
10:41 <!Tene>: The passage in the book of mormon saying "Don't take my word for it, try these things out for yourself, live them and test them and see if they work for you" is describing a scientific method.
10:41 <!Tene>: It's describing experimentation.
10:41 <!Tene>: When someone makes a discovery in physics, they publish how they did it, so that other people can do the same thing and verify their results.
10:42 <!Tene>: This is exactly the same. "I have found truth here. This is true and good. I ask you to try it out yourself because I want to share it with you."

...

10:45 <!Vee>: I basically agree with you
10:46 <!Vee>: I think that religion and science are like apples and oranges as the cliche goes.
10:46 <!Tene>: I personally would consider Religion to be just as much a valid scientific field as Chemistry.
10:46 <!Vee>: But I am asking for discussion on the topic because I am repeatedly faced by the contrary position.
10:47 <!Tene>: Howso?
10:47 <!Vee>: Here are examples that have recently been brought to my attention
10:47 <!Vee>: "During the youthful period of mankind's spiritual evolution human fantasy created gods in man's own image, who, by the operations of their will were supposed to determine, or at any rate to influence the phenomenal world. Man sought to alter the disposition of these gods in his own favor by means of magic and prayer... The main source of the present-day conflicts between the spheres of religion and of science lies in this concept of a personal God... The more a man is imbued with the ordered regularity of all events the firmer becomes his conviction that there is no room left by the side of this ordered regularity for causes of a different nature." -- Einstein, from a 1939 essay
10:49 <!Vee>: "A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death." -- Einstein
10:50 <!Vee>: "It doesn't seem to me that this fantastically marvelous universe, this tremendous range of time and space and different kinds of animals, and all the different planets, and all these atoms with all their motions, and so on, all this complicated thing can merely be a stage so that God can watch human beings struggle for good and evil - which is the view that religion has. The stage is too big for the drama. " -- Feynman, 1959 Interview (From Genius by James Gleick)

{{chatline|10:54|!Vee|Feynman in particular has quite a number of statements that say, well, in effect, that science has on a number of basis disproven the Biblical description (as well as other religious descriptions) of historical and metaphysical things

11:03 <!Tene>: My personal feeling about that is that it looks just the same as if they were talking about the ancient beliefs of the human body being governed by the Four Humours or that matter is composed of the Four Elements.
11:03 <!Tene>: I do agree with the majority of those statements.
11:03 <!Tene>: All of them, in fact.
11:03 <!Tene>: And they in no way conflict with my religious beliefs
11:04 <!Vee>: And that a scientist will have a less strong religion than a non-scientist, because the conflicts on those subjects will make him question the rest of the religions teachings
11:07 <!Vee>:  :)
11:08 <!Vee>: I agree with TenE
11:08 <!Tene>: For Historical matters, I believe that there are Issues with translations and record-keeping of the Bible and other such works.
11:08 <!Tene>: I don't know what the 'metaphysical' issues are.
11:09 <!Vee>: a) I don't think that God usually uses "non-law of physics" methods to influence the order of things..... He just knows the "laws" a lot better than we do.
11:10 <!Vee>: hence no "magic" is necessary
11:11 <!Vee>: as for the orderliness of the universe..... I think that speaks much more strongly for an intelligent agent than the operation of chance
11:13 <!Vee>: if "science" has disproven the need for "unnatural intervention", then mathmatics has proven its necessity
11:15 <!Vee>: and lest "reason" has driven out the need for "other explanations" I would like to remind everyone that the "Laws of Physics" as currently written by humans conflicts with itself
11:16 <!Tene>: I wouldn't say an intelligent agent, necessarily, as that seems to speak of someone choosing to move all of the objects around consciously.
11:16 <!Tene>: but... that's more a semantics issue
11:16 <!Tene>: so I shut up.
11:17 <!Vee>: so do I disbelieve in science? no. It is a human disapline that strives to detect the order of the universe and facilitate the use of natural law to human benefit. And I believe it does just that
11:18 <!Vee>: "Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts." -- Feynman, Address to the National Science Teachers' Association
11:18 <!Tene>: To me, religion is just as much part of the universe as anything else.
11:18 <!Tene>: And it has to be, or else it is meaningless.
11:18 <!Vee>: *nods*
11:19 <!Tene>: I do believe that the statements you have quoted *do* apply to many major religions.
11:19 <!Tene>: And those are, in fact, some of the reasons I follow the LDS church.
11:20 <!Tene>: Because it is the only religion that makes sense to me.
11:20 <!Vee>:  :) I agree
11:20 <!Tene>: I also follow it because of personal experiences that have shown me that it is true in ways that I can not deny.
11:20 <!Vee>:  :) again I agree
11:22 <!Vee>: as for scientist[s] not being able to believe in religion because of the conflicts between their science and religion.... some of the most religious people I know are scientist[s]
11:24 <!Tene>: I would say that they are unable to believe in untrue religions in just the same way that most sane people cannot follow bizarre cults.
11:24 <!Vee>: My father grew up disbelieving in religion until long after he became a particle physicist when he joined the LDS church
11:25 <!Tene>: I am unable to follow or believe any religion that any of those earlier statements would apply to.
11:25 <!Vee>:  :)
11:26 <!Tene>: However, I do assert that there is at least some degree of truth, often quite a bit, in the vast majority of religions.
11:26 <!Tene>: Probably All.
11:26 <!Vee>: metaphysical - what things are, where they come from, what man is BTW
11:26 <!Tene>: Yes, but I don't know what the Issues there are.
11:26 <!Tene>: is more what I meant.
11:26 <!Tene>: The disagreements.
11:27 <!Tene>: but I didn't say it well.
11:29 <!Vee>: so essentially Feynman says that science disagrees with religion about what man is (a sack of carbon based protiens, bones and tissue vs a spiritual entity) where he came from (evolution vs creation) and why were here (random occurance vs a purposed existance)
11:30 <!Vee>: perhaps where we are going (recycled back into the particle soup of the universe vs an afterlife)
11:32 <!Vee>: an historical "events" like creation, the lengthening of the day by Joshua, the flood, the migrations of the human family, the formation of languge, etc.

Part 2: Woozle reads the scrollup and responds

Woozle notes:

  • I still need to summarize the relevant bits of this; I may well end up moving the trascript to a separate page and putting only the summery here
  • Times are in MST (Mountain Standard, 2 hours earlier than Eastern)
11:32 * TheWoozle reads the scrollup and responds more or less sequentially...
11:33 <!TeneIsATaquito>: My grandfather has something to say about the Lengthening Of The Day thing.
11:33 <@TheWoozle>: I like Tene's suggestion that religion can/should be approached scientifically. I'd be able to deal with religion a lot better if more people took an approach like that.
11:33 <@Harena>: (*sticks her head in* global warming! *sticks her head back out again*)
11:33 <!TeneIsATaquito>: He has taught religious lessons on the general subject, and they go basically like this.
11:33 <!Vee>: hehe... Yay! Ahrena!
11:33 <@Harena>: noooo, i'm not here! really!
11:33 <@Harena>: >.>
11:33 <@Harena>: <.<
11:34 <@TheWoozle>: Unfortunately, many people seem to take the dogmatic approach, i.e. all truth is derived from writings of the ancients, and the only way we learn more truth is by studying and interpreting those writings.
11:34 <!TeneIsATaquito>: He writes a statement on a chalkboard or something of the sort saying that he has observed the sun rise in the west and set in the east.
11:34 <!TeneIsATaquito>: He asserts it to be completely true and he will sign his name to it.
11:34 <!TeneIsATaquito>: Woozle: my response to that is "Where did the ancients get the knowledge?"
11:35 <!TeneIsATaquito>: It's true that there are people a lot more knowledgeable than me about everything, and it's good to learn from them.
11:35 * TheWoozle nods... "And why can't we use their sources?"
11:35 <!Vee>: Tene and Woozle: Yes
11:35 <!Vee>: I think what woozle is saying
11:36 <!TeneIsATaquito>: the continuation of that lesson is him saying that he saw it while crossing the pacific ocean in an airplane while he was in the military.
11:36 <!Vee>: is that many religions say the heavens are closed, that God has sent his word and will send no more
11:36 <@Harena>: they do? 0.o
11:36 <!TeneIsATaquito>: The events that he described happened, but without more information we can't really know what they mean.
11:36 <!TeneIsATaquito>: Yes, they definitely do.
11:36 <!Vee>: so we are left to rely on what we already have without personal exploration or confirmation
11:36 <@Harena>: huh.
11:37 <@TheWoozle>: Heh... good story, Tene.
11:37 <@Harena>: silly religions.
11:37 <@TheWoozle>: And point.
11:37 <!TeneIsATaquito>: That's a major point of contention between other religions and the LDS church.
11:37 <!Vee>: We don't agree with those religions either
11:37 <!TeneIsATaquito>: other Christian Religions, even.
11:37 * TheWoozle now has that Edie Brickell song running through its head...
11:38 * Harena is what is commonly known as "Flabbergasted" to hear that.
11:38 <!TeneIsATaquito>: That's strongly related to the "all we need is the bible, the bible is the only source of truth" thing
11:38 <@Harena>: ahhhh
11:38 <@TheWoozle>: Coming out of left field, and not actually responding to anything in particular (not that I'm done reading & responding): Ok, so why is it that the LDS takes young men, has them dress in frighteningly clean-cut suits, and go around with engraved nametags saying "Elder" on them?
11:38 <@Harena>: i see.
11:38 <!Vee>: We believe that God continues to lead teach and guide just as He always has and that if you don't understand, or disagree, have a question you can take it up with Him personally.... ask!
11:38 <!TeneIsATaquito>: "We have a bible and we need no more bible and there never will be any more bible"
11:39 <@Harena>: Vee: works for me!
11:39 <!TeneIsATaquito>: Vee: you wanna answer or would you like me to?
11:39 <@TheWoozle>: (I also have a response to the "science has disproved religion" quote, but it got too long and involved...)
11:39 * TeneIsATaquito wants to avoid toes-stepping-on.
11:40 <!Vee>: no
11:40 <!Vee>: go ahead TenE
11:40 <!Vee>:  :)
11:40 <@Harena>: huh. i thought science was just the explanation Behind The Scenes of religion. oslt
11:40 <!Vee>: (I get ahead of meself all the time)
11:41 <@Harena>: (i mean, just the math behind How God Did It. in Our Own Words.)
11:41 <!Vee>: Harena: In fact many early scientists stated just that
11:42 <!TeneIsATaquito>: Woozle: it's something generally like this: "I believe that this is true and good. I want to give other people the opportunity to be exposed to this, so that they can try it for themselves."
11:42 <@Harena>: Vee: and got locked up for it? or were those different scientists?
11:42 <!Vee>: That they were trying to find God's method, not disprove His existence
11:42 <@TheWoozle>: That's part 2 of the issue, which I wasn't actually raising...
11:42 <@TheWoozle>: Part 1 is: why the suits? Why the frighteningly tidy (and all greyscale) dress? Why the engraved nametags? Why "elder"?
11:43 <!TeneIsATaquito>: The appearance is partly because they are representing the LDS Church.
11:43 <@TheWoozle>: Other churches don't dress their representatives so scarily.
11:43 <@TheWoozle>: LDS wants people to think they are scary?
11:43 <!Vee>:  :)
11:44 <!Vee>: hehehe
11:44 <@TheWoozle>: LDS wants people to think they are tightly regimented?
11:44 <!Vee>: (sorry)
11:44 <!TeneIsATaquito>: I don't understand how to respond to that because I don't understand how that is scary.
11:44 <!Vee>: I do
11:44 <!Vee>: can I answer?
11:44 <!TeneIsATaquito>: Yes, you may.
11:44 <@TheWoozle>: Well... my *emotional* reaction is "my god, they look like nazis in training."
11:45 <@TheWoozle>: And I don't even *have* a god, so... ;-)
11:45 <!TeneIsATaquito>: heh
11:45 <@Harena>: every hair in place. t'ain't nat'ral.
11:45 <@Harena>:  ;)
11:45 <@TheWoozle>: LDS wants people to think they control every aspect of their believers' lives? (There's another...)
11:45 <!Vee>: They are suppose to look like they are clean cut professionals with an eduation and a clue, not a bunch of "long haired hippy freaks "  ;)
11:46 <@Harena>: oooo, like us? (W&I) ;D
11:46 <@TheWoozle>: Hmm... meaning that people tend to assume anyone from LDS must be a long-haired hippy freak?
11:46 <!Vee>: of course some people like long haired hippy freaks  :)
11:46 * TheWoozle doesn't...
11:46 <@Harena>: hey!
11:46 <!Vee>: no.
11:46 <!Vee>: but think about it
11:46 <@Harena>: i'm a long haired hippy freak!
11:47 * TheWoozle has met too many of same.
11:47 <@Harena>: i hug trees too!
11:47 <@Harena>: >.>
11:47 <!Vee>: most missionaries are 19 to 21
11:47 <@Harena>: <.<
11:47 <@TheWoozle>: They don't look like real people.
11:47 <!Vee>: they mostly haven't finished college and mostly aren't' very world savvy
11:47 <!TeneIsATaquito>: Also, while they are serving, they are leaving their own lives behind for a period of time in order to devote themselves entirely to the work.
11:48 <!TeneIsATaquito>: I *believe* that part of it is representative of that.
11:48 <!TeneIsATaquito>: Vee could probably explain that part better.
11:48 <!TeneIsATaquito>: Or tell me if I'm full of oranges.
11:48 <@TheWoozle>: Well... when, say, representatives of NCPIRG or the Human Rights Coalition come to the door, they're about the same age, but they look presentable.
11:48 <!Vee>: for what it is worth, I was one of those missionaries, but not in the US but in the DR
11:48 <@TheWoozle>: And since they're young and not very world-savvy, why are they being called "elder"?
11:49 <@TheWoozle>: That's, like, backwards.
11:49 <!Vee>: and there, because everyone thought we looked like CIA or FBI we dressed a bit different
11:49 <@TheWoozle>: Yeah, that's what they look like... only they're too young, so I know they can't be.
11:49 <!TeneIsATaquito>: Part of it is that they want to stand out and be recognizeable, I believe.
11:49 <!Vee>: I wore a jumper denim dress and no socks and sandals
11:50 <@TheWoozle>: And perhaps I'm sensing the "leaving their lives behind ... to devote themselves entirely to the work", and that seems... unhealthy, to me.
11:50 <!Vee>: But everyone knew what we were when they saw us.... yeah what TenE said
11:50 <@TheWoozle>: It's too easy to get lost in a system of belief, or a big task... and forget about reality.
11:50 <!Vee>: we only do it for 18 to 24 months
11:51 <@TheWoozle>: They want to stand out and be recognizable -- so it *is* a sort of uniform.
11:51 <!TeneIsATaquito>: Yep.
11:51 <@Harena>: ooo, it's like doing an internship or something...
11:51 <!Vee>: sort of
11:51 * TheWoozle nods
11:51 * TheWoozle is allergic to uniforms
11:51 * TheWoozle sneezes
11:51 * Harena patpats W... it's okay
11:51 <@TheWoozle>: See!
11:51 <@Harena>: we won't put one on you ;)
11:51 <!TeneIsATaquito>: The word 'elder' is the title of their office in the church, I think is a vague way of referring to it?
11:51 * TheWoozle goes to get some uniform kleenez
11:51 <@TheWoozle>: *kleenex, even
11:51 <!Vee>:  :) But you can understand how some peopl emight respect and listen to missionaries more because of their "uniforms"
11:52 <!TeneIsATaquito>: Also, it's a completely voluntary choice, not required at all.
11:52 <!Vee>: right
11:52 <!TeneIsATaquito>: re: getting lost etc.
11:52 <@TheWoozle>: Yeah, I think I've heard that term. Using that term to mean (effectively) "junior" or "cub scout" seems, again, quite backwards.
11:52 <@TheWoozle>: My paranoid side says it reeks of mental programming.
11:53 <!TeneIsATaquito>: I can see how you could get that feeling.
11:53 <!TeneIsATaquito>: I can definitely see that.
11:53 <@Harena>: it's a bit of a knee-jerk reaction for me too.
11:54 <@Harena>: but then i've gone through mental programming from the catholic church so thereyago
11:54 <!Vee>: well we don't brain wash in the way that we isolate people, terrorize them and deprive them then feed them unnatural concepts til they relent
11:54 <!TeneIsATaquito>: nodnod
11:54 <@Harena>: . o O (the catholic church does... >.> <.<)
11:54 <!Vee>: we talk, and if you don't want to listen you don't have to
11:54 <@TheWoozle>: Vee: true. I'm thinking something much more subtle, and less... wacked-out.
11:54 <@Harena>: . o O (well, sort of)
11:54 <@TheWoozle>: LDS people aren't even 1/10 as scary, from what I hear, as Scientologists.
11:55 <@Harena>: *shudder*
11:55 <@TheWoozle>: And from personal experience, LDS people are also far less scary than most Baptists.
11:55 <!TeneIsATaquito>: One thought related to that is to think about how there are things very similar to Homeopathy and Herbal Medicine and such that are just... wrong and ungood.
11:55 <@TheWoozle>: (Well... Southern Baptists.)
11:55 * Harena nods. yeah.
11:55 <!TeneIsATaquito>: (know what sorts of things I'm referring to? 'cause I don't specifically.)
11:55 <@Harena>: some of that stuff makes me just cringe 'cause it makes the rest of us look bad.
11:55 <!TeneIsATaquito>: nodnod
11:56 <@TheWoozle>: Tene: like some religious sects refusing any and all medical treatment?
11:56 <!Vee>: kind of like scary religions/cults make us look bad
11:56 <!TeneIsATaquito>: nodnod
11:56 <@Harena>: oh, i do. *thinks of Bubba's idea of a cure-all was to put drops of one's own urine in one's ear*
11:56 <@TheWoozle>: Yarr.
11:57 <!Vee>: eww
11:57 <@TheWoozle>: heh
11:57 <@Harena>: yeah. he swore by that.
11:57 <@TheWoozle>: "eww" about sums it up for me too. ;-)
11:57 <!TeneIsATaquito>: I can tell you that some of my very good friends have served missions, and various other people that I know very well.
11:57 * Harena has heard of drinking urine being beneficial but she had never heard of putting it in one's own ear
11:57 <@Harena>: 'course that was for survival in the desert, different scenario
11:57 <!TeneIsATaquito>: That's just anecdotal, of course.
11:57 <@Harena>: yes.
11:58 <@TheWoozle>: Sometimes anecdotal is the best data we have to work with.
11:58 <!TeneIsATaquito>: erm... what I said is anecdotal, that is
11:58 <!TeneIsATaquito>: My Father served a mission in Italy, for example.
11:58 <!TeneIsATaquito>: StoryTime's older brother, who I also know very well, served in Costa Rica just recently
11:58 <!Vee>: yeah. I went to the DR, serif to California, and both my bros to Ohio
11:59 <!TeneIsATaquito>: StoryTime is working on trying to serve a mission in about six months.
11:59 <!Vee>:  :)
11:59 <@Harena>: and i should like to point out that extreme paganish & stuffnthings makes me equally uncomfortable as "Jesus Freaks"
11:59 <@Harena>: erm * paganism
11:59 <!Vee>: yeah. That's when we get back to all religions are not equal.
11:59 <@Harena>:  :P
11:59 <!TeneIsATaquito>: StoryTime is the person I trust more than anyone else to be aware and sensitive of stuff like that.
12:00 <!TeneIsATaquito>: (he knows everything!)
12:00 <@TheWoozle>: Did I already bring up the idea of a catalog of religions? I must have...
12:00 <!Vee>: Just cuz x religious person kills people for "god" does not all reilgious people convict
12:00 * Harena still tends to cringe at the sound of people invoking Jesus's name just because of the bad'uns. and that makes me sad.
12:00 <!TeneIsATaquito>: He is one of the most pragmatic and intelligent people I know.
12:00 <@Harena>: and tells good stories too >.> <.<
12:01 <@TheWoozle>: At its best, religion seems to serve as a kind of central organizing point for introspective activities.
12:01 <!TeneIsATaquito>: and I like to believe that I would notice if there was any sort of feeling of that sort of thing at all.
12:01 <@TheWoozle>: (Introspective activities being something that is/are very important to me, believe it or not.)
12:02 <@Harena>: heh. W is one of the most introspective people i know ;)
12:02 <@TheWoozle>: (and also being one major difference between me and just about everyone else in my family)
12:02 <!Vee>: So.... yeah... even among my religion some missionaries can take an obnoxious and inappropriate teaching method, but I don't think I did
12:02 <@Harena>: can't picture that you did, Vee :)
12:02 <!Vee>: and I don't think it is necessary or really the norm
12:02 * TheWoozle wishes there were videos of Vee in action ;-)
12:02 <@Harena>: hee.
12:03 <!Vee>:  :)
12:03 * TheWoozle can't imagine that it wouldn't be instructive.
12:03 * TheWoozle can't not avoid preventing the disuse of non-double-negatives.
12:03 <@TheWoozle>: (Or something like that.)
12:03 <!Vee>: hehe
12:04 * Harena gets caught up in W's vortex of double negatives & is swallowed up!
12:04 <@TheWoozle>: *burp*
12:04 <@TheWoozle>: ...Regarding "A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties; no religious basis is necessary."... highly relevant article: http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-01/osu-rmi010606.php
12:05 <!TeneIsATaquito>: Yay, StoryTime's online now!
12:05 <@TheWoozle>: The article basically says that (a study has shown that) your sense of ethics is highly influenced by who you choose as a role model.
12:05 <@TheWoozle>: yay!!
12:05 <!Vee>: (and I think their teaching methods should be the attribute to judge not their funny attire  ;)
12:05 <@TheWoozle>: ...not so much "who" as an individual, but what their relationship is to you. That is... people who named either friends or clergy as role models tended to be the most sensitive to ethical issues.
12:05 <@Harena>: yay!
12:06 <@TheWoozle>: Which I found very interesting.
12:06 <!TeneIsATaquito>: His response to the Appearance issue:
12:06 <!TeneIsATaquito>: "They are asked to dress neatly and modestly. "Cleanliness is next to godliness" as they say, and formal attire naturally follows as that most befitting the servants of the Lord."
12:06 <@TheWoozle>: Meh... says them.
12:07 * TheWoozle thinks The Lord would probably like a bit more variety.
12:07 <@TheWoozle>: But what do I know.
12:07 <@Harena>: heh... *vaguely wonders how often Moses and/or Jesus even, bathed & shaved* ;)
12:07 <!TeneIsATaquito>: In people in general, yes, I agree.
12:07 <!TeneIsATaquito>: "The nametags let you know who they are. We wouldn't want anyone thinking we're trying to hide anything, and wearing a nametag with "JESUS CHRIST" in big letters on it, as well as the name of the church and the person wearing the tag help people readily understand they're talking to a missionary."
12:08 <@TheWoozle>: Well... personally, I think having engraved tags -- especially for junior members -- is going a bit far.
12:08 <@TheWoozle>: What's wrong with "HELLO, my name is..."?
12:08 <@TheWoozle>: Much less pretentious.
12:08 <!TeneIsATaquito>: It's not for Junior Members, no other members of the LDS church wear anything of the sort.
12:08 <!TeneIsATaquito>: at all
12:09 StoryTime [~ace@bf6674e.285ef2b1.slkc.qwest.net] has joined #religion
12:09 <@TheWoozle>: Ok, Junior Proselytizers... or however you want to describe these "Elders".
12:09 <!TeneIsATaquito>: and repeat that for StoryTime
12:09 <@Harena>: yeah.. i think that W has a point... it does give off a sense of Holier-Than-Thou'ness... though, again, that's from my own negative experiences
12:09 <@Harena>: Story!
12:09 <@TheWoozle>: <TheWoozle> Well... personally, I think having engraved tags -- especially for junior members -- is going a bit far.
12:09 <@TheWoozle>: <TheWoozle> What's wrong with "HELLO, my name is..."?
12:09 <@TheWoozle>: <TheWoozle> Much less pretentious.
12:09 * Harena poings in circles around StoryTime ^_^
12:09 <StoryTime>: Howdy!
12:10 * TheWoozle greets El Tiempo del Storie ^_^
12:10 <@TheWoozle>: (or something similar in equally bad Spanish)
12:10 <StoryTime>: Well, if you're gonna' be wearing it for two years, it saves a lot of time from having to write your name on stickers everyday.
12:10 <@TheWoozle>: Hmm.
12:10 <@Harena>: heh.
12:10 <StoryTime>: But seriously...
12:10 <@TheWoozle>: Two years, eh? Hmm.
12:10 <StoryTime>: Yeah, that's how long a missionary serves usually.
12:10 <StoryTime>: Day in and day out
12:10 <@TheWoozle>: That makes sense.
12:11 <!TeneIsATaquito>: StoryTime: http://allalone.org/religionlog.txt
12:11 <StoryTime>: Some try to get it extended after that time.
12:11 <!TeneIsATaquito>: if you're interested in where this came from and such
12:11 <@TheWoozle>: I think part of what scares me about the whole thing is that there just seems to be so little room for individualism.
12:11 <@Harena>: all 1984/mind-controllish?
12:11 <StoryTime>: Heh. Being a missionary is about losing yourself in the work, but being a member is a very different concept.
12:11 <@TheWoozle>: Now, mind you, I'm not going to go the other direction and say they have to have at least 10 pieces of "flair", and anything less than 15 (voluntarily, of course) isn't really trying...
12:12 * Harena snrkles at W
12:12 * StoryTime is lost by that statement
12:12 <@TheWoozle>: ...but people who voluntarily drop all semblance of individuality just... worry me.
12:12 <@TheWoozle>: ST: reference to "Office Space".
12:12 <@Harena>: he's just quoting-ish from Office Space
12:12 <StoryTime>: Ah
12:12 <!Vee>: woozle: unfortunately they are talking to th egeneral public and the general public thinks it is polite and respectful to dress "nice" and look "responsible"
12:12 <@TheWoozle>: Then why don't the Jehovah's Witnesses dress the same way?
12:13 <StoryTime>: You'd have to ask them.
12:13 <!Vee>: I don't know
12:13 <@TheWoozle>: I mean, the JHs that come to the door are obviously Dressing To Impress as well -- but they look *different*.
12:13 <@Harena>: now, now, don't be lumping them all together, W ;)
12:13 <StoryTime>: Hey! I have a reference for this! Just a second.
12:13 <@TheWoozle>: They don't look like they're recruiting for the Borg.
12:13 <!Vee>: hehe
12:13 * StoryTime goes and gets his missionary handbook and looks up the dress and grooming standards.
12:14 <@Harena>: yay!
12:14 <@TheWoozle>: Harena points out that I might actually be confusing the JHs and the LDSs...
12:15 * Harena allus thought it was the Jehovah's who went about in suits & bicycles
12:15 <@TheWoozle>: ...cuz there was this one day last month when both groups came to the door (well... both doors), within minutes of each other.
12:15 <@Harena>: . o O (darn having 2 front doors!)
12:15 <!Vee>: hehe
12:15 <!Vee>: I promise that they don't try to do that
12:16 <@Harena>: . o O (those are the guys that look scary to me)
12:16 <@TheWoozle>: I'm *pretty* sure it was the grey suits with the "elder" tags who were the LDS people, and the more casual ones who noticed that I was wearing dishwashing gloves and said they didn't want to take up my time were the ones with the Watchtower.
12:16 <!TeneIsATaquito>: You're correct, Wooz.
12:16 <@TheWoozle>: Yay.
12:17 * TheWoozle figures that the reason the LDS elderkids didn't notice I was doing the dishes was because they were men... ;-)
12:17 <@TheWoozle>: (The JH people were chicks.)
12:17 <!TeneIsATaquito>: Heh.
12:17 <!Vee>:  :)
12:17 <@Harena>: ah, now you can't blame male-cluenessness on the religion, W! ;D ;D
12:17 <@TheWoozle>: Exactly.
12:17 <@TheWoozle>: That was my point.
12:18 <!TeneIsATaquito>: 40950_missionary_3772_st.jpg
12:18 <@TheWoozle>: Yep, that's them.
12:18 <@TheWoozle>: They look like *total* Young Republicans.
12:18 <@TheWoozle>: Only more so, if that's possible.
12:19 <!Vee>: so let me get this straight.... It is their lack of individuality and relaxness that scares you and convinces you they are brainwashed and or the Borg?
12:20 <@TheWoozle>: Well... to overstate my POV...
12:20 <!Vee>: (brb I have a demand for juice)
12:20 <@TheWoozle>: I'd rephrase it as "...makes me worry that..." or "...causes an emotional reaction along the lines of...", perhaps both.
12:20 * StoryTime thinks he's looking through the wrong handbook thing.
12:21 <@TheWoozle>: Otherwise: yes.
12:21 <StoryTime>: Well, have you seen the sister Missionaries?
12:21 <@TheWoozle>: And I'm not so much worried about brainwashing, even though it does press those buttons a bit.
12:21 <@TheWoozle>: ST: no -- I was kinda wondering...
12:21 <StoryTime>: Their nametags say "Sister <blahblahblah>" and such.
12:22 * TheWoozle nods
12:22 <!TeneIsATaquito>: And they're female.
12:22 <StoryTime>: And I've never seen two dressed the same.
12:22 <@TheWoozle>: So... boys get to be elders, but girls only get to be sisters?
12:22 <!TeneIsATaquito>: "only"?
12:22 <@TheWoozle>: And the boys generally have to dress the same, but the girls don't?
12:22 <@TheWoozle>: "sister" = sibling = peer
12:22 <StoryTime>: You try getting to women to wear the same outfit *winks*
12:22 <@TheWoozle>: "elder" = older = superior
12:22 <@TheWoozle>: That's the associative imagery *I* get, anyway.
12:23 <StoryTime>: Heh.
12:23 * Vee goes looking for picts
12:23 <!Vee>: hmmm
12:23 <!Vee>: my scanner isn't set up
12:23 <@TheWoozle>: So... the boys wear the same outfit because they can be cowed into doing so, but there's enough flexibility that the girls (who won't bow to authority) are allowed to dress how they want?
12:23 <StoryTime>: Well, the title of "elder" refers to a office in the melchezidek (spell?) preisthood.
12:23 <StoryTime>: Nah, that was a joke.
12:24 <@TheWoozle>: (That would be my favorable interpretation of the most recent stuff ST said...)
12:24 <StoryTime>: The point is that you're supposed to dress formally.
12:24 <@Harena>: and girls can't carry that title?
12:24 * StoryTime is pursuing two lines of thought at once.
12:24 <@Harena>: ah, & in formal attire, there is room for more variety for women in general so there you go?
12:24 <StoryTime>: Yeah.
12:24 * Harena is doing too many convo's at once as well & it's frying her wee ferret brains ;D
12:24 * TheWoozle is also allergic to strict gender roles... probably more so than to uniforms, even.
12:24 * StoryTime comforts Harena.
12:24 <StoryTime>: Heh.
12:24 <!Vee>: specials5.jpg
12:25 <@TheWoozle>: Less scary, by a good margin.
12:25 <StoryTime>: Well, we believe that gender is an inherent part of your spiritual identity. Men and women are naturally born with different spiritual gifts and such.
12:26 <StoryTime>: If you're allergic to the concept that men aren't women and women aren't men, prepare to do lots of sneezing.
12:26 <@TheWoozle>: What does the... uhh, whatever you call it that defines what "we believe"... say about people whose mental gender is different from their physical gender?
12:26 <StoryTime>: Gospel?
12:26 <!TeneIsATaquito>: Doctrine, maybe.
12:27 <@TheWoozle>: Gospel, dogma, scripture, doctrine... yeah, doctrine.
12:27 <StoryTime>: Yeah, lots of terms.
12:27 * TeneIsATaquito shrugs.
12:27 <@TheWoozle>: (Doctrine: n. a small doctor.)
12:28 <StoryTime>: Your gender is part of who you are. By saying that someone has a different "mental gender" from their physical gender is kinda' silly to me.
12:28 <@TheWoozle>: (Doctrino: n. a subatomic particle exchanged between a physician and patient which causes the patient's bank balance to vanish within the billing department's event horizon.)
12:28 <StoryTime>: I've none some feminine guys and some masculine girls, but they were still guys and girls.
12:28 <!Vee>: where now we get to a topic I think we've covered before
12:29 * TheWoozle has some educatin' to do...
12:29 <@TheWoozle>: Not really prepared to do it right now, tho.
12:29 <StoryTime>: Heh.
12:29 <!Vee>:  :)
12:29 <@TheWoozle>: I'm (tentatively) planning to start a wiki on the subject of gender; it's that complicated.
12:29 <StoryTime>: I'm familiar with the concept, I think, Woozle. ^^
12:30 <StoryTime>: Gender identity and stuff is pretty complicated.
12:30 <@TheWoozle>: There's lots of evidence that gender-identity, while *usually* aligned with physical identity, is not always the same. (Just to summarize)
12:30 <!Vee>: I could say that as the church goes gender doesn't bug me nearly as bad as the rest the world's gender views
12:30 <StoryTime>: Yeah.
12:31 <@TheWoozle>: Which, in a nutshell, means that any doctrine that has firm opinions on gender roles etc. is going to need to be able to deal with those exceptions.
12:31 <StoryTime>: Having a different gender identity doesn't make you a different gender.
12:31 <@TheWoozle>: That's a matter of definition, I think.
12:31 <!Vee>: wait!
12:31 <StoryTime>: Heh.
12:31 * TheWoozle waits...
12:31 * StoryTime waits
12:31 <!Vee>:  :)
12:31 * TeneIsATaquito waits
12:31 <StoryTime>: Yay for waiting!
12:31 * TheWoozle looks at wristwatch... two hairs past a freckle...
12:32 <!Vee>: I think we've established that to Woozle, gender identity is an important concept
12:32 <@TheWoozle>: Having a different gender identity means you might not be comfortable with the default gender role(s).
12:32 * StoryTime nods.
12:33 * StoryTime also notes that we might need to clarify definitions of gender roles too, but that it can also wait.
12:33 <@TheWoozle>: So there needs to be flexibility, in order to allow for that.
12:33 <!Vee>: As I have stated in the past, I don't think that xy/xx has much to do with football watcher versus shopaholic
12:33 <@TheWoozle>: A friend of mine was very into Morris Dancing.
12:34 <@TheWoozle>: She had a troupe of Morris Dancers, and they were very good.
12:34 <!TeneIsATaquito>: Wooz: does there need to be "flexibility" or would it be okay for that to be "not an issue"?
12:34 <@TheWoozle>: And then they went to England, for a Morris Dancing competition.
12:34 <@TheWoozle>: Now... in England, Morris Dancing is a men's thing.
12:34 <!Vee>: I think that what is and isn't gender specific is precisely at the heart of thise discussion
12:34 * StoryTime nodnods. {{{3}}}
12:34 <@TheWoozle>: They were all incensed that this bunch of women would be competing in a men's field, and they were basically rude and dismissive.
12:35 <@TheWoozle>: Now... that's an example of a gender role that is probably more or less arbitrary.
12:35 <@TheWoozle>: Which isn't to say that all gender roles are arbitrary.
12:35 <@TheWoozle>: I would agree that most women are probably more interested in nurturing and keeping the nest clean than are most men.
12:36 <@TheWoozle>: (For example.)
12:36 <StoryTime>: My mom is our ward's primary president. She's in charge of organizing and coordinating activities for all the kids in our ward. Typically, this is a "leading and whatnot" kinda' role which some old stupid gender roles would place as a mans job. My dad is a teacher in that same primary. He teaches lessons to a class of 11-year-olds.
12:36 <@TheWoozle>: But making that into a role which everyone has to follow... is less good.
12:36 * TheWoozle reads ST's bit...
12:36 <StoryTime>: Does this clear up the fact that the existance of gender roles is not necessarily a restrictive concept inline with say.. medieval society?
12:37 <@TheWoozle>: Well... it opens the door for flexibility; I just don't know enough about LDS's ideas about gender roles to say whether they really bother me or not.
12:37 <@Harena>: in my two marriages (albeit as bad as they were), it was my hubby's that got the cooking stuffnthings & i who got the hardware & power tools ^_^
12:37 <@TheWoozle>: I've heard a few suggestions/hints that did worry me, but I may have been misreading them.
12:37 <StoryTime>: Heh.
12:38 <StoryTime>: Our church has nothing against women using power tools, though the men still do it more often than the women.
12:39 <@Harena>: and in general q public too *nod* ;)
12:39 <StoryTime>: Lemme see... the cut and dry issues on gender in our church...
12:39 <StoryTime>: Q?
12:39 <StoryTime>: Ah.
12:39 <StoryTime>: Well, men can't be mommies.
12:39 <StoryTime>: That's the woman's job.
12:39 <StoryTime>: And women can't be daddies.
12:40 <@TheWoozle>: "Woman was given to man as an helpmeet."
12:40 <StoryTime>: Heh.
12:40 <StoryTime>: I heard a talk on that once.
12:40 <StoryTime>: Do you know what "helpmeet" actually means?
12:40 <@TheWoozle>: Do tell...
12:40 <!Vee>:  :)
12:40 <StoryTime>: It's a partner, not a servant
12:40 * TheWoozle was objecting more to the "given to man" part.
12:41 <StoryTime>: Ah.
12:41 <!Vee>: (/me uses the power tools around here and serif does the cooking)
12:41 * StoryTime likes to cook.
12:41 <@Harena>: (see? Vee *is* my twin!)
12:41 <!Vee>:  :)
12:41 <@TheWoozle>: Maybe most women are comfortable wearing that sort of mantle, but I definitely know a few who would be... highly allergic to it.
12:41 <StoryTime>: Mantle?
12:42 <!Vee>: woozle
12:42 <!TeneIsATaquito>: Fireplace.
12:42 <@TheWoozle>: Mantle as in having the role of being given to someone else, to help with their stuff -- rather than having their own initiatives.
12:42 <!Vee>: the scriptures also refer to the man giving himself to his wife
12:42 <@TheWoozle>: Yes, so why don't they say that at the first?
12:43 <@TheWoozle>: You can't say "God made women and men to be for each other" and still have the story of the Garden of Eden, I suppose.
12:43 <!Vee>: I think it is sematics myself
12:43 <@TheWoozle>: If you've got the GoE, then man came first; end of story.
12:43 <StoryTime>: Heh.
12:43 <StoryTime>: So?
12:44 * StoryTime doesn't think it's a seniority rule...
12:44 <@TheWoozle>: Well... that implies a lot of things, whether they're meant to be implied or not.
12:44 <@TheWoozle>: And if they're not meant to be implied, then there should be clarification.
12:44 <@TheWoozle>: It implies that men are primary, somehow.
12:44 <!Vee>: the scritptures indicat often that family matters are a joint effort and that it is a work to do together, both parents for a common goal
12:45 <@TheWoozle>: Right... but they always start with the woman being there for the man. First came Adam, then Eve -- who was only a small part of Adam that God inflated somehow.
12:45 <StoryTime>: In traditional Hebrew society, iirc, a father "gives" his daughter to another man to wife.
12:45 <@TheWoozle>: It's a common denominator of many religions.
12:46 <StoryTime>: Why shouldn't a story passed down by such people phrase it the same way?
12:46 <@TheWoozle>: Umm... I'm not sure what your point is...
12:47 <@TheWoozle>: They all phrase it the same way because they all believe more or less the same thing -- that women are meant to be secondary.
12:47 <!TeneIsATaquito>: We don't believe that.
12:47 <StoryTime>: They phrase it that way because that's the way they talk.
12:47 <@TheWoozle>: So why is it still phrased that way?
12:47 <@TheWoozle>: It's misleading, then.
12:47 <StoryTime>: Because people don't like changing the bible.
12:48 <!Vee>: I know for a fact that in practice that the men at church in their own meeting are constantly being reminded to make sure that women in their house are free to attend their meetings and to take care of their own needs for recreation and a break by watching kids or whatever
12:48 <@TheWoozle>: Gotta go pick up podlings, speaking of the sacred role of men and women. :-P
12:48 <StoryTime>: Okay, I was reading in Ephesians chapter 5 yesterday...
12:48 <!Vee>:  :)
12:48 <@TheWoozle>: back in an hourorso
12:48 <StoryTime>: Okiday.
12:49 <!TeneIsATaquito>: We are specifically advised to avoid any thoughts about men being superior, specifically because of that common idea.
12:49 <!TeneIsATaquito>: well, not "thoughts"
12:49 <!TeneIsATaquito>: but, like... things... and stuff...
12:49 <!Vee>: (I wonder if that made anysense what I just said..... basiccally "guys watch the kids and let your wives get out of the house and do stuff")
12:49 <StoryTime>: Heh
12:49 <!TeneIsATaquito>: Although that could still be considered the same thing.
12:50 <!TeneIsATaquito>: That Women need permission from men to get out of the house.
12:50 <!Vee>: no!
12:50 <!TeneIsATaquito>: but that's probably more semantics.
12:50 <!TeneIsATaquito>: like...
12:50 <!Vee>: just that men have an obligation to facilitate it
12:50 <!TeneIsATaquito>: nodnod
12:50 <!TeneIsATaquito>: I get stuck on words ><
12:50 <!Vee>:  :)
12:51 <@serif>: as an aside, the bible starts with men and woman being created together as "mankind"
12:52 <StoryTime>: Yay.
12:52 <@serif>: and when Eve is introduced, the statement is that the man leaves his family and "cleaves" unto his wife, not vice versa
12:53 <!TeneIsATaquito>: also, just because it's vaguely kind of related, the word "woman" doesn't derive from the word "man" >.>
12:53 <!Vee>: serif!
12:54 * Vee huggles serif
12:58 <@serif>: (also note that there is no such word as "his" in hebrew - there are no possessives in the language)
13:01 <!Vee>: (and that there are indications that the original hebrew text was less man oriented on the laws and such.... basically that the laws applied to everyone reguardless of their gender)
13:06 mode/#religion [+o Dhraakellian] by Moose

Part 3: Woozle returns and responds some more

Note: "Moose" is the channel's 'bot.

13:45 <@TheWoozle>: Ok... the thing about how "it's just phrased that way for traditional reasons, and doesn't really mean it that way"... it may be understood within the community that this is so, but anyone outside that community is going to assume that something means what it says, as written...
13:46 <@TheWoozle>: ...which can lead to hostility, if what it *seems* to be saying is something some people find oppressive.
13:46 <@TheWoozle>: Even if that's not what is intended by the community saying it.
13:47 <@TheWoozle>: "A family needs a father to anchor it." Why?
13:47 <@TheWoozle>: "All human beings – male and female – are created in the image of God." ok, that much sounds like an affirmation of each gender's value.
13:48 <@TheWoozle>: "By divine design, fathers are to preside over their families... and .. provide the necessities of life and protection for their families." Why?
13:49 <@TheWoozle>: "Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children." Well ok, if that's what they're good at -- but what if the man is a better nurturer? What if another woman would enjoy the job better than the mother? (Mind you, I'm aware that my ideas on family structure are wacky by normal standards... but still: why not?)
13:49 <@TheWoozle>: (And you could read that as "why shouldn't children have a nanny who is the primary nurturer?", too.)
13:50 <@TheWoozle>: "The father is the head in his family." same song again...
13:51 <@TheWoozle>: "Fatherhood is leadership, the most important kind of leadership. It has always been so; it always will be so." That's BS; not all societies have been patriarchal, and to assume that past patterns must always be repeated seems narrow-minded to me.
13:52 <!Vee>:  :)
13:52 <@TheWoozle>: (reading through this one passage, another issue comes up -- "there is too little religious devotion, love, and fear of God in the home..." The whole idea of fearing God seriously bothers me too, but that is another subject.)
13:53 <!Vee>: what are you reading?
13:53 <@TheWoozle>: It's in frames, so I'm not sure of the URL... I think I can puzzle it out; hang on...
13:54 <@TheWoozle>: tinyurl not responding, so here we go --
13:54 <@TheWoozle>: really long URL
13:55 <!Vee>:  :)
13:55 <!Vee>: wow.... where to begin
13:55 <@TheWoozle>: "The Lord has charged men with the responsibility to provide for their families in such a way that the wife is allowed to fulfill her role as mother in the home." What if those roles don't fit? </